18/07/2011 Newsnight

Tonight, Scotland Yard in turmoil, another resignation at the top of

the Met, is trust in the police the biggest casualty of the phone

hacking scandal? Assistant Commissioner Yates

follows his boss's example and quits, more in anger. There is ill-

informed and malicious gossip being published about me personally.

Another bizarre twist, Sean Hoare, the original News of the World

whistle-blower is found dead. While David Cameron cuts short his trade

trip to Africa, could the crisis cause the stop of his Premiership.

This happened on my watch and I'm determined to get to the bottom of

it. We will discuss the damage he's suffering and the state of the Met,

and discuss the committee hearing with Rupert Murdoch tomorrow. The

United States declared last month their drones had stopped killing

Pakistani civilians, we have new Good evening, is Britain's biggest

and most important police force merely incompetent, or corrupt or

possibly both. You can forgive people for wondering. Public

confidence in police is said to be rocking after two high-profile

resignations. The Met Police chief saying he took a free stay at a

health spa, and botched investigation into phone hacking

and news that a former senior executive of News of the World was

working for the Met at the same time. How far can we trust the yard

and the people running it? Reporters would meet some of the

Met's most senior officers in this wine bar, just a stone's throw from

New Scotland Yard. They were, we are told, on drinking

terms, something which made some other police officers deeply

uncomfortable. But the latest revelations in this fast-moving

story, appeared to show that relationships went even deeper than

this. Journalists, of course, will always

want to meet serving police officers for information, it is

part of the job. For the police, though, it is all about degree and

judgment. I have been told by a former, very senior police source,

that in this bar, in the West End there used to be regular meetings

between News of the World journalists, and Paul Stephenson

and John Yates and the Met's head of media, to discuss stories. I'm

told the relationships were incredibly close.

The former commissioner met with Rupert Murdoch's executives 18

times in four years. There are suggestions tonight that some other

relationships were much closer than this. The $6 4,000 question is was

there any element of the relationship between the police and

News of the World that some how impeded them from pursuing the

phone hacking inquiry. That is the question. The man who decided in

2009 not to reopen the hacking inquiry after spending eight hours

reviewing 11,000 pages of evidence. Has come under relentless pressure

to resign. Earlier today he was threatened with suspension, so he

jumped. We in the police service are truly accountable. Those of us

who take on the most difficult jobs clearly have to stand up and be

counted when things go wrong. However, when we get things wrong,

we say so. We try to put them right. As I have said very recently, it is

matter of great personal regret that those potentially affected by

phone hacking were not dealt with appropriately. Sadly, there

continues to be a huge amount of inaccurate, ill-informed, and on

occasion, down right malicious gossip being published about me

personally. I think once he decided, without properly going through the

evidence, that there was no case to answer, really the writing was on

the wall, and there was no way back. You cannot have somebody in charge

of counter terrorism with that sort of attitude. I think it is shame,

because he has done some very good work, there is no question he was

an outstanding officer. He made mistakes, and he had to pay the

price. This is the man at the centre of the controversy, Wallis,

former deputy editor of News of the World, arrested last week. The Met

paid him �1,000 day, for 24 days media consultancy last year. He

worked closely with commissioner John Yates, whose committee vetted

his application. He was also adviser to the luxury Champneys

health spar, and it emerged that the former police commissioner,

Paul Stephenson, accepted thousands of pounds of free hospitality at

the club. He denied any propriety, and said the company is owned by

family friend and the stay was declared. That wasn't enough to

save him, the commissioner resigned less than 24 hours ago. What was a

commissioner from the police doing accepting such a high-level

incentive or high-level gift. But ultimately the police should be

putting themselves out of reach of any such allegation or inference. I

think you know, incredibly naive, the head of the police shouldn't be

so naive. What I find very odd is the Met had to hire any outside

people to help with publicity, when they had him and 69 press officers,

it almost beggers belief that you would needed a decisional support

in those circumstances. A shrew of advice has followed, the Home

Secretary has asked the police inspectorate to see if the media

has had undue influence over the police, and there will be a new

Press Complaints Commission report The Mayor of London said the two

top officers' resignations had been inevitable. There is absolutely

nothing proven against the probity or the professionalism of either

man. But, in both case, we have to recognise that the Nexus of

questions about the relationship between the Met and the News of the

World, was likely to be distracting to both officers in the run up to

the Olympic games. Two chiefs gone in two days, the

Met is in turmoil tonight. But for some inside the organisation, and

for others, who have recently left, this is an opportunity to break the

ties with the Murdoch press. John Yates has had his critics, angry

about his closeness to News of the World's people, and the new broom

cannot be vigorous enough. I'm sure that there are very good and very

honest officers within the Met, to the highest level, that wanted to

see this cleared out, wanted to get rid of those people who they

thought perhaps were too close to the press. It seems for the police,

that embarrassing fact about their relationship with News of the World

are emerging daily. Tonight, the Met confirmed that a senior

journalist on the paper was employed for a while as a Ukrainian

interpretor, with access to sensitive material. Critics say the

scandal is overplayed with his opponents. But that argument seems

far fetched in the light of evidence such as this.

I'm joined by previous mayor, Ken Livingstone, and Boles, and Sir

Chris Fox. This is pretty catastrophic for the

Met, to lose such senior officers, who were very highly regarded in

the profession, whatever mistakes they might have made? It certainly

is, at a time when the Met is under a lot of pressure, particularly to

lose Paul, who I have the highest regard for, it is a tragedy. You

hear the mayor actually saying, there is nothing proven against him

in any way, and it just seems rather sad and rather, a very toxic

situation to deal with. That is his basic problem, I think. Given that

it is very toxic, and given we don't know where it ends, actually,

is there any reason for the public to have full confidence in the

Metropolitan Police tonight? There are 30-40,000 officers in the

Metropolitan Police, we are talking about a handful of officers here,

although some senior ones. I think the public know that the vast

majority of officers are getting on with their job. Indeed, when you

look at some of the things that are alleged and talked up, I think John

Yates used the word "gossiped", when you see some of those things,

when they are seen in a proper investigative way, and balanced

against the time those decisions were made, and balanced against

what was happening in the rest of the environment, it may not looks a

it does now. So I just feel that it is all one way traffic at the

moment. That must be exceedingly frustrating for the senior people

in the Met. When you were Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone, why didn't

you see some of it coming? There was no evidence of it, this arises

from the Guardian expose say in 2009. There was closeness between

officers and News of the World back to when you were the mayor?

looks back many decades, that wasn't an issue. Unlike the current

mayor I did a press conference every week, nobody from the BBC or

the Guardian came along and said there is more to this than meets

the eye. We saw hacking into the Royal Family, and in 2007, the

people guilty went to prison. At that stage nobody came to me and

said we think there is much more to this. Had they done so I would have

made certain it was investigated. Wasn't your relationship with News

of the World too close, you wrote columns for the Sun, you did do t

you must have been reasonably close. You also spent �350,000 of money on

the PR company run by Matthew Freud, the husband of a Murdoch. We looked

for marketing company and they were the most successful bid. They

happened to be connected to the Murdoch family? You simply can't

get away from it, Rupert Murdoch phoned the four editors of his

papers in Britain, just before the last mayoral election, to make

certain they were endorsing Boris Johnson, I think I must be doing

something right if Rupert Murdoch intervenes to oppose my election.

You had to use out of all the PR companies on planet earth you had

to use a Murdoch connected one? They were a very good one, we got

�21 million investment from China after those offices opened. Boris

Johnson talks about the nexus, the guy working for News of the World

as a translator for News of the World and Scotland Yard at the same

time. We have Neil Wallis's daughter and so on, and so on. How

far does it go? I don't know, this is something the various different

inquiries launched will have to get to the bottom of. There was a

culture in which this was normal. It wasn't just a few bad apples

doing bad things. If it had been that it would be less worrying. It

was a culture where this seemed fine, and people who were good

people and police officers, thought it was normal to have a lunch with

a journalist, and maybe take a bit of money for something. That was

wrong? It was wrong, that is where we have to root out the whole thing

not a few individuals. Why did Boris Johnson when some of it came

up said it was codswallop, there was a degree of complacency in

London too? The whole political class have underestimated this for

a very long time. Frankly, we were all in the business of trying to

win the approval of various newspapers and various journalists

and editors and even proprietors, and as the Prime Minister has said

we are all at fault here, Boris is not excluded interest that, nor is

he the only one. Sir Chris Fox, do you worry there will be more

resignations from the Met over this, these two were at the top of the

tree. A lot of people were feeding them manufactures which turned out

to be rubbish? I don't know, I don't know enough about it, there

hasn't been a proper investigation, that worries me more than anything.

People are being forced into resignation positions before

anybody has had a proper cold investigative look. I mean, hearing

that some of the nonsense that has been spoken, for example, if you

are the commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, you are

constantly under media spotlight, you are a target for Fleet Street

or Wapping, as it is, a target for international press, it is

absolutely quite normal for you to want the best strategic advice you

can get, and what better than from an editor from a big title. So you

are going to have to involve yourselves at the top of the media

world, otherwise you will not survive t has been proven you won't

survive. You have to be able to play the game, and you have to be

able to deal in information which means that it is not about giving

information, it is about make sure that you are providing the

information which is keeping the media satisfied.

It maybe so, but you are also the head of the most prestigious police

force in this country and if you have somebody who is working for

you, who works for an organisation, or worked for an organisation which

is under investigation, surely you must smell a rat there, there is

something wrong. All these people who resigned, none of them did

anything wrong, Rebekah Brooks didn't do anything wrong, Andy

Coulson didn't do anything wrong, the police officers didn't do

anything wrong, why have they all gone? If we wait the until the

investigation was done, we might know the answer to. That the bottom

of this for me, whenever the police actually do take action, one of the

tactics of the people they take action against is to start

complaining about them. It happens at the very lowest level, the

contables on the street know about it, they have complaints made.

There is a system in place for those complaints to be investigated,

coldly, and factually decided. That is what should have happened in

this case. The Metropolitan Police authority should have investigated

it, they should have waited for that. And then come to a conclusion.

But the actual hysteria that has generated round a story like this,

leads people into a position where they have no choice. If he this

want to continue to investigate this, and be accepted as truthful

and honest investigators, they have to resign. Because the atmosphere

is such that no-one gives them a chance to do that. Let me asks you

two, you are both intimately involved in the running of London,

do you think we might come to regret this, will you sleep more

easily tonight knowing that two people, tasked with the security of

the Olympic games, and dealing with terrorism, have gone from the Met?

There was nothing good about these people going. The only one I have

had dealings with was Paul Stephenson, and I thought he was a

remarkable man, one of those police officers who automatically inspires

confidence. As he himself said, he reached the conclusion that he

could no longer command public confidence, as this thing ran and

ran. In probably one of the most challenging years for London

security. It was a conclusion he drew. Do you think we will regret

it? I don't, because there are very talented officers there, Cressida

has taken on the role Yates had. And you have a deputy commissioner

embedded in awful this. These two people have had to go, they went

because they were asked to look into this, they failed to do it.

Were they lied to by junior officers, in way skaist case they

have to be cleaned out. If it is simply they were naive and

accepting there is nothing in there, and been there and told that by

junior officers, they have a real complaint. They have gone, but the

Prime Minister, who was warned about Andy Coulson, and mateor of

London, who was warned a year ago by Labour members there was

something wrong, they stay in place. Now the myriad of new developments

and strange twists to this story are taxings everyone following it,

there was another example tonight with the death of the News of the

World, who blew the whistle on phone hacking, Sean Hoare. Police

say the circumstances are not suspicious.

You better remind us of who Sean Hoare was? He was a very colourful

character, a showbiz reporter on News of the World, successful at

his job, until he was dismissed with drink and drug problems some

time ago. All the people I speak to speak of him as a very talented

showbiz reporter. Who had a multitude of resources and very

good at his job. As you mentioned in the introduction, the police in

Hertfordshire are not confirming his identity, but it is widely

reported it is Sean Hoare found death in Watford. The circumstances

are said to be unexplained, but not necessarily suspicious. But what we

do know about him, of course, was that he had the guts, I suppose, to

come out some weeks ago now, and talk openly about the endemic

culture of phone hacking at News of the World. I think we can see a

clip from it. It was endemic, it happened. REPORTER: When you say it

was endemic, phone hacking and the use of illegal practices to secure

stories, that was endemic, is what thank what you were saying? Yeah.

People are scared, if you have to get a story, you have to get it,

you have to get that by whatever means. One of his other colleagues

was dris direction one of the few people - Matt Driscoll, one of the

few people to talk about hacking, and others who have appeared on the

programme before. The thing about speaking openly about it, some of

them sign confidentiality agreements, and some have been so

closely linked into the phone hacking, aleedgedly, they don't

want to speak. It is remarkable that Matt Driscoll spoke about his

experiences too. When we were both approached to talk by the New York

Times to b what was going on. We were discredited about having an

axe to grind because we left the newspaper. That was unfair, because

all we wanted to do was tell the truth. You have to remember, my

shef and Sean, were one of a hand - myself and Sean were one of handful

of people who left the paper without a confidentiality clause.

We were one of the few people who could tell the truth. That is an

interesting point. Sean Hoare would have been real use to the

inquiries? He would have been a huge asset. Especially given that

his time in the paper coincided with Andy Coulson kouls who went on

to become communication - Andy Coulson kouls, who went on to

become communications director for the Prime Minister. Heternal

experience of the widespread culture - he had internal

experience of the widespread culture of hacking. There is a new

joke at Westminster tonight, what is the difference between God and

David Cameron, God is everywhere, David Cameron serve where - is

everywhere except in the House of Commons. At the moment the Prime

Minister is still on Trade Commission to Nigeria and South

Africa, which he maintains his more pressing than his role in the

biggest scandal in his time in office. Some are wondering if the

crisis could yet engulf his Premiership. Spot the difference,

two of the mightiest men in Britain. Who both employed former top News

of the World journalist, for PR advice. On the right, Met chief,

Paul Stephenson, who quit last night, after Thursday's arrest of

Neil Wallis, over alleged phone hacking. On the left, David Cameron,

still Prime Minister, after his former aide, Andy Coulson, was

arrested the week before. A similarity hinted at by Sir Paul

in his resignation statement. And with the spotlight increase league

on Mr Cameron, even though he was on a trade trip to South Africa

today, he tried to tackle it. would say that the situation in the

Metropolitan Police is really quite different to the situation in

Government, not least that the issues that the Metropolitan Police

are looking at, and the issues around them, have had a direct

bearing on public confidence into the police inquiry, into the News

of the World, and indeed to the police themselves. And for my part

what I would say, is this, that we have taken very decisive action.

But Ed Miliband, speaking in London, was determined to pursue the

comparison. Sir John Stevens has taken responsibility and resigned

over - Sir John Stevens, has taken responsibility over the hiring of -

we need leadership to get to the truth over what happened. But the

Prime Minister is ham strung by the decisions he made and his refusal

to face up to them. This afternoon Boris Johnson said Sir Paul

Stephenson's resignation was the right thing to do, but he wasn't so

helpful to his friend, David Cameron. REPORTER: If it was, as

you say, the right call for Sir Paul Stephenson, for hiring a PR

man in the phone hacking scandal, shouldn't David Cameron resign over

the hiring of a PR man in the phone hacking scandal? I'm not here to

discuss Government appointment, I'm here to talk about events in the

Metropolitan Police Service, those questions you need to direct to

Governments. I don't think there is a very clear read-across in this

matter, afterall I'm not aware that Number Ten Downing Street was

actually in charge of an investigation. REPORTER: The Prime

Minister has just called a judicial inquiry of it, of course he's in

charge of an investigation, he has just called a judicial inquiry?

Michael, I know the point you are trying to make. It is not relevant

to whey want to do with policing in London. This is a matter you must

direct to Number Ten Downing Street, I suggest you ask them. It was left

to Nick Clegg, of all people, the man who last year warned Cameron

about Andy Coulson, to come to the PM's aid. I don't think this is

about the Prime Minister's position, absolutely nod, let's keep this in

- not, let's keep it in perspective. The issue with the police is the

fears that a criminal investigation may have been compromised in some

way, that is the focus of people's attention today. Thanks.

Then, when the Home Secretary told MPs she was launching three new

inquiries, into aspects of the police, Labour resumed its attack.

The judgment of the Met has been called into serious question, by

appointing Neil Wallis, but so has the judgment of the Prime Minister

by appointing Neil Wallis's boss, Andy Coulson. People will look at

this and think it is one rule for the police and one for the Prime

Minister. But May, unlike Jeremy Hunt last week, went on the

offensive. She asked about the whole question of the difference

between the Met and the Government. Of course there is a difference

between the Met and the Government. The Metropolitan Police were

investigating allegations of wrongdoing at the News of the World.

I think it is absolutely right that there should be a line between the

investigators and the investigated. Then classic piece of Dennis

Skinner. People are resigning at Murdoch's,

people are being arrested, all over the place, and yet only one area

remains intact, on millionaire's row, the Government bench. When is

"dodgy" Dave going to do the decent thing and resign. But it wasn't

just Labour MPs who were sensing blood. What has been striking about

today is the degree to which Tory bloggers and MPs are starting to

talk about David Cameron's future. By shares, - buy shares in Theresa

May was the whisper after her performance today, including from

one ministerial aide, not her's, I should stress. There has always

been a substantial chunk of Tory MPs who have never liked David

Cameron, but now, right-wingers, who once saw Andy Coulson as their

mate who agreed with them on issues like crime and immigration, are

ironically exploiting his demise to stick the boot in.

Welcome, I didn't know you were so young. He won't be at this rate!

For David Cameron, who met Desmond Tutu today, has announced he will

return from Africa early, tomorrow morning and not Wednesday morning.

More time, to prepare his statement for the extra Commons sitting,

which today was called for Wednesday. Meant to be the first

day of MPs' summer break, some hope. I'm joined by the deputy leader of

the Labour Party, Harriet Harman, and the Conservative MP, Nick Boles

is still with us. There is something wrong with the

Prime Minister's judgment here? made clear he received assurance,

which he accepted, the same assurances were given to a Scottish

court, the Scottish court accepted them. They didn't employ him as

spokesman in Number Ten? Sorry, they call made some pretty big

decisions in relation to Mr Andy Coulson. He has received those

assurances, and if those assurances turned out to be lies, he will put

his hand up and say it was the wrong decision. The biggest thing

levelled at him is niavity, all of this frothy talk, about him looking

at his position like the Metropolitan Police commissioner,

it is end of term giddyness. It is 3.00am, the phone rings in Downing

Street in a national crisis and somebody that has displayed niavity

answers the phone, is that what we want? That is not what I have said,

it is the worst levelled at him is niavity. He is not niavity and

gullible? A Scottish court was also guilty of the same niavity, the

police and a Parliamentary Committee, the Labour Party, who

frankly hosted, wined and dined the Murdochs for decades were also

guilty of the same niavity, we are all, as the Prime Minister said n

this together, we have all failed as politicians to understand the

nature of the relationship. Harriet Harman you are part of this pattern

of niavity? We are not all in this together, it is not a Scottish

court running the country, it is not a Scottish court that hired

Andy Coulson, he didn't have to hire Andy Coulson. It was a Labour

Prime Minister who invited Rebekah Brooks for a slumber party at a

taxpayer paid for grace and favour mansion, Chequers, after, after,

News of the World journalists had been convicted of phone hacking. So

therefore, don't come all high and mighty on us, don't get on to your

little moral high horse, the Labour Party was up to its neck in this,

and we're not claiming we are better, we are not claiming we are

without sin, but the Labour Party to start its claiming without sin

will not wash. Answer that? What was about to happen, is we were

within days of David Cameron's Government waving through Rupert

and James Murdoch's bid to own not only the Sun, News of the World and

the Times, but the whole of BSkyB, and David Cameron saying that he's

determined to get to the bottom of this, he went all the way to South

Africa in order to not to answer questions, he has got some's to

answer. - questions to answer. When you have a crisis engulfing the

Metropolitan Police, which is very serious, whole issues raised about

the press, you do expect leadership from the Prime Minister, and

because he will not acknowledge his error in employing Andy Coulson,

because he will not answer questions about BSkyB, he cannot

show that leadership. Are you saying that because Neil Wallis was

a resigning matter for the Metropolitan Police commissioner,

that Andy Coulson is a resigning matter for the Prime Minister?

are not calling on the Prime Minister to resign. You didn't

dispute Dennis Skinner's point. is not the Labour Party's position

to call on the Prime Minister to resign, we are calling on him to

answer questions, two questions in particular. Which is why he's

coming back on Wednesday. The logic surely is he should go, if you

think it is right for Sir Paul Stephenson to resign over what he

presumably did. Presumably your logic is he should go? No, we are

calling on him to answer questions. You called on Ken Clarke to go over

a misstatement of rape, this is the Prime Minister over who he employs

in Downing Street, it is OK for him to stay? He didn't have to employ

Andy Coulson, he did, and that was an error of judgment. We are

calling on him to acknowledge it was an error of judgment. Nobody

can see David Cameron as Prime Minister, leading the country and

the Metropolitan Police, through this difficult crisis, if he won't

acknowledge his own error of judgment. There is another question

he won't answer. There is one more question, you have had your say.

There is another question he won't answer, he was having dinner right

at the height of this crisis with Rebekah Brooks r we really to

believe he didn't discuss the BSkyB bid. This is the shadow. He won't

answer that question. His judgment, in going to South Africa, and

Nigeria, when this is going on, that was also daft? Can you tell me

what is the judgment call in saying to the President of South Africa,

extremely important ally and trading partner, and the President

of Nigeria, that because of a little local difficulty, which, by

the way you have dealt with by announce ago full judicial inquiry,

with wide ranging powers, supported by every part of the house, when

this deal threatening has already been dropped by News Corp, what

would the credibility attached to a decision to pull out. What would

people around the world. Why is he coming back earlier? Because he has

seen the South African Prime Minister and the Nigerian President.

Because it is right and proper for parliament, before it rises, to

have a final statement on this on the whole scandal and the issues.

The Prime Minister has to continue to be Prime Minister and is right

to do things? He has come back because Ed Miliband was clear he

would call for the House to sit on Wednesday for the questions to be

answered. The truth is David Cameron is so boxed in by his wrong

judgment about Andy Coulson, and about his involvement with BSkyB.

Harriet were there any wrong judgments when you were deputy

leader. When you were in Gordon Brown's Government, have there been

wrong judgments in Tony Blair's Government. You want to ask her

about wrong judgments. I would like to hear the end of the sentence and

then we will come to you? There is a crisis and he can't show the

leadership a Prime Minister should. At least we have had remarkable

leadership from Ed Miliband, and David Cameron has followed.

leadership Gordon Brown showed in not calling for a judicial inquiry

or setting up after the original phone hacking. Ed Miliband has

broken through this, hopefully there will be a reasonable

settlement to all of this. I'm on my fifth Prime Minister now, I have

never seen one looking more slippery and less prepared to

answer the questions. Weren't the Conservatives 1% ahead of you in

the opinion polls today? All we are saying is there are questions to

answer. Maybe he has good answers? He has gone up to South Africa away

from it. Excuse me the phones of the Royal Family were bugged.

have just heard Harriet give herpes. You seem blowing a lot of air.

is pumping air into this. What the met commissioner resigned, Milly

Dowler's phone hacked. You have lost all sense. A very senior judge

has the judicial inquiry. Forced to by Ed Miliband. He didn't interrupt

you, he stopped when I told him to. He called for News Corp to withdraw

the bid for BSkyB. Only after he was forced to by Ed Miliband.

left for South Africa before Sir Paul Stephenson resigned. He comes

back one day before to answer questions. If that isn't a Prime

Minister balancing his many responsibility. Ed Miliband has

nothing else to do but chase this hear, the Prime Minister has a lot

to do, he has to deal with the fact that gas prices went up by 18%, and

the eurozone breaking up, he has to deal with the fact that we are

trying to help businesses grow by exporting with Africa. He has to

deal with the fact that Nick Clegg was the most robust supporter of

him not his front bench competing with Nick Clegg. He's a

very good deputy Prime Minister. Where are all the other

Conservative cabinet ministers conspicuous by their absence

sorry for my lowly status. Michael Crick is a brilliant journalist, he

can always find three of the mad and bad and usual suspects to

rumble off in any subjects, whether Labour, story or Lib Dems, there is

no rumbling in the Tory Party about anything other than the fact that

Labour is looking this up to try to make a big bang before they all go

off on their holidays. There is no good in shouting at me about this.

Milly Dowler's phone was hacked. There will be a judicial inquiry.

I'm feeling sympathy for Speaker Bercow. It is important that a

murder victim's phone was hacked, it is important that there was a

police investigation that didn't get to the bottom of hacking. It is

important we have lost the Metropolitan Police commissioner,

it is important that we were in days of Murdoch having the BSkyB,

and it is important that the Prime Minister answers questions and

comes to the House. All of that is happening. There is a judicial

inquiry and the Prime Minister will make a statement and having debate

on Wednesday, what more do you want. We will follow it with great

interest. Last month the Obama administration said it had taken

steps to ensure that civilians in Pakistan would not be hit by unmand

drones the United States was using against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda.

Tonight Newsnight has new evidence that this confidence is simply

wrong. I'm joined by the defence editor, Mark Urban. Is part of this

due to the chill in relations between Pakistan and Washington?

is, it has always been a secret war, if you like, conducted by the CIA,

in Pakistan, using these unmanned aircraft. If one looks at the

history of it, one can see how it is ramped up. But now there are

questions in the wake of the Bin Laden raid. Of course the vast

majority of the raids have been carried out in the tribal areas, on

the border with Afghanistan there. Over the years the numbers have

gone up steadily. In the first few years of the strikes, 2004-007,

there was just handful. Then we see it going up, 2010, under the Obama

administration, reallyising, but a policy never really fully publicly

articulated. 118 strikes last year, 45 so far this year. The Pakistanis

said a couple of months ago they wanted them stopped, they ordered

the CIA out of an bears in Pakistan where some of the - of a base in

Pakistan where some of the strikes have been launched from. There have

been a couple of dozen since then, were they done against the will of

the Pakistani Government, like the Bin Laden attack. We know the

Americans are intensely sensitive about it, and John Brennan's talk

of allaying fears, the President's In other words, that because they

have been checking no other people are in the compounds when they

strike, they say no-one has been killed as a result in the past.

Since all this last year. Have they delivered on that

ambition, that promise? This is where the new research comes in. It

is done by the Bureau of Investigative Journalismism, a non-

profit organisation of journalists, who dig into this kind of thing,

they have done some works on strikes carried on in 2010, when wi

is when the US changed its policy. They say by their reckoning, 45

people, civilians, who were not militants or key figures in the

leadership of Al-Qaeda or the Taliban, were killed during that

period. They are looking at a further 15 incidents, where they

would estimate at least another 60 uninvolved people were killed,

making well over00 casualties. Now the US has - 100 casualties. The US

has respond the to the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, saying

they are widely off. This is the response to that. We had feedback

from the intelligence community saying, that categorically, they

standby their view that absolutely no civilians have been killed in

Pakistan since August 23rd last year. Yet we have named individual,

named children, we have photoic evidence, we have sent researchers

into the field and looked at this, we followed it up through NGOs and

lawyers in Pakistan. We can't understand why they are

categorically saying no civilian deaths when the evidence seems to

show that. These claims are hard to back up? There is a lot of reports

from the tribal areas, an exhibition of photographs from the

area is opening in London. This was the 23rd of August last year, that

killed circumstance civilians s - civilians, there was this boy,

killed in a strike two months after that change in targeting. So the

bureau's position on this, who conducted the area, they have sent

researchers into the area, and looked into the family background

of those supposed to be killed in this. It making it more interesting

considering the fraught and tangled relationship between the US and

Pakistan. Back to the main story tonight, if you could sell tickets

to tomorrow's encounter between Rebekah Brooks, Rupert Murdoch and

James Murdoch, you might have more takers than the Olympic games if

you could sell the tickets. Our political editor Michael Crick is

here to discuss the issues. Days don't get bigger than this?

could go down as the most dramatic day in parliamentary history. Like

day when you have a string of back- to-back football matches on

television. We start off at 12.00 with Paul Stephenson, who resigned

last night, with the home affairs committee, followed by John Yates

at the same committee, then it switches to the Culture Committee,

starting with a double header, Rupert Murdoch and his son James,

followed by Rebekah Brooks. It has to be the Murdochs which will be

the most interesting moment. The extraordinary thing, in 42 years of

owning newspapers in this country, Rupert Murdoch has never answered

questions from a Commons select committee. He has done it in

America and Australia, he has even answered questions from a Lords

committee, they had to go to New York to do it. The interesting

thing is, in the morning the culture select commit committee

will meet and decide whether they will make the Murdochs and Rebekah

Brooks swear on oath. Which is unusual. If the MPs do that and the

witnesses don't tell the truth or tell lies, they could be prosecuted

for perjury through the courts. On the other hand, there are MPs who

worry that if they do that the Murdochs and Rebekah Brooks will

clam up even more than they may well do so, relying on lawyers, and

the legal investigations and so on. There is so many parts to this, it

is difficult to know exactly what they will focus on in their time,

what sort of questions will they try to get to? The Murdoch, they

have only got them there for an hour, that is the schedule. It

boils down to the age-old Watergate question, what do you know and when

did you know it. In particular with the Murdochs, at what point did

they realise that the hacking scandal extended well beyond the

single rogue reporter, which of course was the News of the World

line for many years, as advanced by Les Hinton, the former boss, when

he addressed the culture select committee four years ago. The other

thing MPs are bound to go on to the Murdochs and Rebekah Brooks is

these extraordinary settlements News of the World had with Gordon

Taylor, and the Professional Footballers Association, and Max

Clifford, they were paid three quarters of a million pounds in

compensation and legal costs over their phone hacking. Why were such

huge sums paid, and in particular, when James Murdoch admitted the

other day he had agreed those payouts, what was it, he said at

the time he had done so without the full facts. What facts is it he

knows now about those cases. That is clearly one of the many

fascinating areas they will want to probe. Great questions we look

forward to the answers tomorrow. A quick look at the front pages

Apology for the loss of subtitles for 83 seconds

The police are examining a laptop That's all tonight, we are back

with more tomorrow, with among other things all the news of the

committee hearing. Worth tuning in Good evening, cloudy and damp night

tonight, means a pretty grey start into tomorrow morning. Brightness

develop ago I way from some western coasts and hills, that brightness

will be enough to add heavy showers through the afternoon. North West

England still cloudy, one or two showers, further showers in the

south. But there will be well scattered, one or two spots staying

dry, brightness if not sunshine inbetween. The south coast is

rather cloudy across Cornwall, northern parts of Devon, the

morning showers we will see here will ease a bit. South eastern

parts of Wales and to the west and north a predominantly cloudy day

with little in the way of brightness. Some brightness in

Northern Ireland, most dry and showers in the north. To the north

plenty of cloud, and there will be some outbreaks of rain, mainly

light and patchy. Prospects from Tuesday into Wednesday, there won't

be a huge amounts of change. Huge showers across Scotland, the

heaviest in the south west. For England and Wales, the difference

from Tuesday to Wednesday will be again increases of cloud with more