The Leveson Inquiry

by Blamhappy Thu May 31, 2012 10:01 am

I know it's a it late, but I'm starting the thread because Jeremy Hunt gives evidence from 10 this morning and this could be explosive.

Someone I follow on Twitter believes that Hunt might resign soon after giving evidence. How will this affect the evidence he gives (will he be braver?)? How will all this impact on David Cameron? What will be the general knock-on effect?

I think we could also discuss other aspects of the "hacking scandal" in general here too. Let's include discussion on Andy Coulson, who was charged last night with Perjury in relation to his court case in 2010.

It's quite exciting if you're sad like me Smile

by Blamhappy Thu May 31, 2012 10:07 am

"‏@StevenNott
I'm expecting Jeremy Hunt to resign from his position in Government today after he appears at #Leveson. Problems at the heart of Government"

by Blamhappy Thu May 31, 2012 10:08 am

"norman smith ‏@BBCNormanS
Jeremy Hunt says he would not describe himself as "a cheerleader" for the Murdochs #leveson"

by Blamhappy Thu May 31, 2012 10:18 am

He looks like a defeated man to me. I don't think he's comfortable, and he looks like he's reminiscing, as if it's all over.

I almost feel sad watching him.

by **Phil Hornby** Thu May 31, 2012 11:06 am

Just how shifty is this bloke, Hunt?!

All Leveson has heard so far this morning is : " I can't recall..."; " I probably knew..."; " It's possible that..."; " I don't believe that I ..."; " I would imagine that..."; " I think I..."; " I may well have...".

Does he know anything? Or is he a man with a convenient case of total memory loss? Personally, I would trust him about as much as I would an ill-intentioned tarantula in my underpants.... Shocked

by Blamhappy Thu May 31, 2012 11:13 am

That's interesting - I was actually thinking that he's more open than I expected.

No one at Leveson recalls anything, and they all talk about their own actions as if they're discussing someone else. I was expecting that approach from Hunt since there's so much suspicion on him.

I'm watching this with great fascination. I think he looks uncomfortable, but Steven Nott feels that he's "quietly confident". I'd say more people feel the same way I do.

Do you think Jay's doing a good job with him?

by Blamhappy Thu May 31, 2012 11:52 am

From the Guardian website, which has a link to the video of the inquiry, plus a live blog:

11.37am: Here is a brief summary of Jeremy Hunt's evidence so far:

• Hunt texted James Murdoch on 21 December 2010 – hours before he was given responsibility for BSkyB bid – congratulating him on European clearance for News Corp's £8bn takeover. "Just Ofcom to go," he told Murdoch.

• Hunt texted George Osborne saying "seriously worried we are going to screw this up" minutes after Vince Cable's anti-Murdoch remarks were made public.

• Osborne replied "hope you like the solution" – a reference to No 10 handing Hunt responsibility for the controversial takeover.

• Hunt accepted he expressed a "positive view" of the BSkyB bid in a private text message to James Murdoch on 21 December 2010.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/may/31/jeremy-hunt-leveson-inquiry-live#block-84

by Blamhappy Thu May 31, 2012 12:07 pm

"justice4daniel ‏@justice4daniel
Mr Hunt had an unminuted meeting as Culture Secretary with James Murdoch TELEGRAPH #leveson http://tinyurl.com/czgv62y"

by oftenwrong Thu May 31, 2012 12:20 pm

It's the same with online banking, Blam. You can reduce the balance to zero very easily, but the account number still shows every time you log in. Like the smile of the Cheshire cat.

by trevorw2539 Thu May 31, 2012 12:44 pm

Blamhappy wrote:That's interesting - I was actually thinking that he's more open than I expected.No one at Leveson recalls anything, and they all talk about their own actions as if they're discussing someone else. I was expecting that approach from Hunt since there's so much suspicion on him.

I'm watching this with great fascination. I think he looks uncomfortable, but Steven Nott feels that he's "quietly confident". I'd say more people feel the same way I do.

Do you think Jay's doing a good job with him?

Me too. And haven't most people looked uncomfortable at times. A high profile Inquiry, demanding detailed information from ages back. Every word you've spoken under scrutiny. Even if you are honest and open you'd have to be nerveless not to be uncomfortable at times, trying to remember exactly what you said, what happened. Millions of viewers, many convinced you are guilty by media condemnation. I defy any of you to claim you would not be apprehensive under the same circumstances.

We will all have our opinion at the end of the Inquiry. Let's wait till then before we condemn anyone.

The one thing that came to mind was the personal and private views regarding Sky. I have the personal view that Brendan Rodgers is the wrong manager for Liverpool, but leave it to the experts for their decision. That does not stop me giving my own opinion.

by **Phil Hornby** Thu May 31, 2012 1:50 pm

Jeremy 'Cheerleader' Hunt : The Sky is the Limit

The Leveson Inquiry Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRXbs8GyYsI3FwldOYd-leACB8FihBKop3dUZ1dL1wm4cTmA1Nd

(guardian.co.uk)
" My own totally proper Tory bias is, of course, nothing like that nasty LibDem bias, displayed earlier by that dreadful Cable chappie.....

by skwalker1964 Thu May 31, 2012 2:34 pm

Latest post from my blog skwalker1964.wordpress.com:

This morning I’ve submitted the following Freedom of Information request to David Cameron’s office (point 6 was added, and the whole submitted as a new request, following a very useful suggestion in the comments!):

Dear Prime Minister’s Office,

Under the Freedom of Information Act, I require to know the
following:

1) Whether ministers, special advisors, civil servants and other
government personnel were coached or in any way given preparation
for their testimony to the Leveson enquiry.

2) Whether any such coaching/preparation was provided to
non-government witnesses, and if so, to whom.

3) How any such coaching or preparation was funded.

4) The cost of any such training or coaching.

5) By whom the training/coaching was carried out.

6) Any emails/texts sent from the private or official email accounts and mobile phones of ministers, officials and other agents regarding the above.

Yours faithfully,

Steve Walker

If the Tories have been using public funds to prepare them to defend their wrongdoings, it’s a clear misuse of public funds. Details of who received coaching, and by whom the coaching was done, should be very significant and highly relevant to the results of the enquiry, and to the (un)fitness of Cameron and co to lead the country. If public funds have been used to pay for coaching of any witnesses who are not/no longer in govt, and who might potentially give testimony damaging to the Conservative party, that is even more serious.

Watch this space for news on what response I get.

by astra Thu May 31, 2012 2:45 pm

All the best Steve.

by Adele Carlyon Thu May 31, 2012 3:32 pm

He's a bloody rotter! Nothing that comes out of his gob will convince me that he wasn't about to hand the Murdoch's everything they were after on a plate. He should do the decent thing and resign. He's responsible for his lapdog, so even if it was all the special advisers fault, he should still resign. Do any of the cabinet have any bloody morals?

by trevorw2539 Thu May 31, 2012 4:22 pm

Adele Carlyon wrote:He's a bloody rotter! Nothing that comes out of his gob will convince me that he wasn't about to hand the Murdoch's everything they were after on a plate. He should do the decent thing and resign. He's responsible for his lapdog, so even if it was all the special advisers fault, he should still resign. Do any of the cabinet have any bloody morals?

If we held every employer personally responsible for every employees misdemeanor the business community would be in chaos. It appears this employee (lapdog) went beyond his remit, and was disciplined accordingly.

Morals?

Morality can also be seen as the collection of beliefs as to what constitutes a good life. Since throughout most of human history, religions have provided both visions and regulations for an ideal life, morality is often confused with religious precepts. In secular communities, lifestyle choices, which represent an individual's conception of the good life, are often discussed in terms of morality. Individuals sometimes feel that making an appropriate lifestyle choice invokes a true morality, and that accepted codes of conduct within their chosen community are fundamentally moral, even when such codes deviate from more general social principles.

Moral codes are often complex definitions of moral and immoral that are based upon well-defined value systems. Although some people might think that a moral code is simple, rarely is there anything simple about one's values, ethics, etc. or, for that matter, the judgment of those of others. The difficulty lies in the fact that morals are often part of a religion and more often than not about culture codes. Sometimes, moral codes give way to legal codes, which couple penalties or corrective actions with particular practices. Note that while many legal codes are merely built on a foundation of religious and/or cultural moral codes, often they are one and the same.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morality

So what are my morals compared with others?

by Blamhappy Thu May 31, 2012 4:37 pm

I missed quite a bit - had to run errands - but my friend kept me informed. Here's what he said:

"He is being ripped open on live TV. Robert Jay keeps quoting the notorious texts and emails, and he is putting all the blame on Fred Michel, calling him pushy, cheeky and a desperate flatterer. Unbelievable display of blame-shifting.

He says he didn't know that his advisor (Smith) was in touch with Michel. How could he not know his closest aide was briefing News Corp? If that's the case, he just accused Smith of massive corruption.

He's now defending Smith, saying that he was only trying to bat away Fred Michel's constant nagging."

His general comments were:

"I wonder what will happen with hunt. Cameron's arm is being forced right up his back. If he orders an investigation into hunt, he exposes himself yet again, and he surely won't want yet another member of his inner circle being investigated. With sayeeda warsi under investigation, Coulson in jail, the whole government on trial at leveson, the lib dems on the brink of revolt (which would effectively be a suicide bombing), and osborne running scared from the press over his pathetic, weak budget, AND both the IMF and the European Commission begging them to drop the cuts and come up with a new strategy, cameron's position couldn't possibly be worse.

On top of all that, they have set up a double bank-holiday next week, which will severely damage june's economic figures, and the olympics will devastate our annual growth, reversing the OBR's 0.8% growth forecast to at least a 1% contraction for 2012."

by Blamhappy Thu May 31, 2012 4:39 pm

trevor, do you genuinely think that Hunt is a respectable person who has done his job fairly and to the best of his abilities?

I'm all for giving people the benefit of the doubt, but I do rather think in this case that the whole saga is pretty transparent.

I am back to watching, and I think Jay's questions are loaded and reflective of what surely most viewers must be thinking?

by trevorw2539 Thu May 31, 2012 5:04 pm

Blamhappy wrote:trevor, do you genuinely think that Hunt is a respectable person who has done his job fairly and to the best of his abilities?

I'm all for giving people the benefit of the doubt, but I do rather think in this case that the whole saga is pretty transparent.

I am back to watching, and I think Jay's questions are loaded and reflective of what surely most viewers must be thinking?

I don't know yet. I will judge him when I have seen and read all the evidence. My experience of life leads me to believe that people make judgements at the first opportunity, whether it is for good or bad. If I were faultless I would like to lay into him, instead of trying to understand his position. If he is proved in the wrong then he should resign. Thank heavens I am not a politician, expected to be 'perfect in every way'. (like Mary Poppins)

by Blamhappy Thu May 31, 2012 5:14 pm

Of course, if I were in charge of the decision as to whether to sack him, I wouldn't be airing my views, but as a layman posting on a forum, I'm happy to say that I think he's been involved in corruption and really ought not have been put in charge of the BSkyB decision.

I admire your keenness to remain open minded and fair, but I feel justified in airing my judgment.

by Blamhappy Thu May 31, 2012 5:16 pm

"Paul Waugh ‏@paulwaugh
After hearing Leveson evidence, Cameron has just decided he won't refer Hunt to Cab Sec for breaking ministerial code."

by trevorw2539 Thu May 31, 2012 5:30 pm

Blamhappy wrote:Of course, if I were in charge of the decision as to whether to sack him, I wouldn't be airing my views, but as a layman posting on a forum, I'm happy to say that I think he's been involved in corruption and really ought not have been put in charge of the BSkyB decision.

I admire your keenness to remain open minded and fair, but I feel justified in airing my judgment.

I have no problem with you airing your views. I may eventually agree with you. I have, unfortunately, seen many injustices in life with hasty decisions based on evidence later proved untrue/unreliable.

by Blamhappy Thu May 31, 2012 5:36 pm

trevorw2539 wrote:
I have no problem with you airing your views. I may eventually agree with you. I have, unfortunately, seen many injustices in life with hasty decisions based on evidence later proved untrue/unreliable.

I understand.

by Redflag Thu May 31, 2012 5:39 pm

Blamhappy wrote:"‏@StevenNott
I'm expecting Jeremy Hunt to resign from his position in Government today after he appears at #Leveson. Problems at the heart of Government"

You will have a long wait BH, its all over and he has not resigned as yet also Scam..er..on has came out and said he will not refer him to the parliamentary commission within the H.O.C. to see if he has breached the Ministerial code of conduct, this is going to cause a whole lot of trouble for them all.

by Adele Carlyon Thu May 31, 2012 6:34 pm

My Opinion is that he's a rotter with no morals. He's let his special adviser carry the can. My opinion is that he was not impartial to this bid and he's actually a ickle liar! The guy worked for him for years, they knew each other inside out, and if Smith thought his boss was gonna go doo lally at him for giving the murdoch's inside info, then I'm sure he (smith) wouldn't have dared. And I am not the least bit surprised that Cameron isn't going to refer him to the cabinet secretary either. They all stick together at the end of the day. But that said, I don't think this is over for him, karma may just come and bite him squarely on the arse one of these days.

by trevorw2539 Thu May 31, 2012 7:12 pm

Adele Carlyon wrote:My Opinion is that he's a rotter with no morals. He's let his special adviser carry the can. My opinion is that he was not impartial to this bid and he's actually a ickle liar! The guy worked for him for years, they knew each other inside out, and if Smith thought his boss was gonna go doo lally at him for giving the murdoch's inside info, then I'm sure he (smith) wouldn't have dared. And I am not the least bit surprised that Cameron isn't going to refer him to the cabinet secretary either. They all stick together at the end of the day. But that said, I don't think this is over for him, karma may just come and bite him squarely on the arse one of these days.

You've never been let down by your friends. Good for you. I have, and I have let my friends down on occasions. Human nature.

Adam Smith, the special adviser to the culture secretary, Jeremy Hunt, has resigned, saying he acted without the authority of his boss and that he had allowed the impression to be created of too close a relationship between News Corps and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/apr/25/jeremy-hunt-adviser-adam-smith-quits

So Smith is a liar too. Where do we stop calling everyone liars.

by sickchip Thu May 31, 2012 7:25 pm

Everyone knows the duplicitous Hunt (correct spelling?) was in place to smooth the way for Murdoch's bid for BskyB.

The only thing that stopped it going through was the fact that the 'phone hacking' scandal broke big with the Millie Dowler revelations. If not for that Murdoch would have been 'given' BskyB by the tories, and we would have been none the wiser about Hunt's chumminess with James Murdoch and others in the Murdoch camp.

Hunt's testimony today was farcical. Pull the other one, son!

I did notice he kept pointing at Smith - ".. it was him mummy, not me".

by oftenwrong Thu May 31, 2012 7:28 pm

"So Smith is a liar too. Where do we stop calling everyone liars."

The description doesn't fit the loyal fall-guy Adam Smith. From his testimony to Leveson it's obvious that the poor wee lad was overworked (and probably underpaid) with few if any firm instructions as to how he was to deal with about 20 to 30 e-mails a day from the Murdoch P.R. Ogre.

The writhing Hunt even disclosed in his own testimony a certain amount of a conscience that Smith had been hung out to dry on behalf of bigger fry.

by trevorw2539 Thu May 31, 2012 7:58 pm

oftenwrong wrote:"So Smith is a liar too. Where do we stop calling everyone liars."

The description doesn't fit the loyal fall-guy Adam Smith. From his testimony to Leveson it's obvious that the poor wee lad was overworked (and probably underpaid) with few if any firm instructions as to how he was to deal with about 20 to 30 e-mails a day from the Murdoch P.R. Ogre.

The writhing Hunt even disclosed in his own testimony a certain amount of a conscience that Smith had been hung out to dry on behalf of bigger fry.

OW. My point was not that Smith was a liar. I don't believe he is. It was in reply to the post that 'The guy worked for him for years, they knew each other inside out, and if Smith thought his boss was gonna go doo lally at him for giving the murdoch's inside info, then I'm sure he (smith) wouldn't have dared'.
Smith contradicts that in the article I quoted. He went ahead without thought or authority, quote 'even though they had known each other for years'.

by Mel Thu May 31, 2012 8:01 pm

Hunt blames Smith. He is responsible for the actions of Smith his Special Advisor, just as Cameron is resonsible for employing Caulson.

Responsibilty is one thing, those two taking responsibility is another. Will either resign? Not on your Nelly.

by oftenwrong Thu May 31, 2012 8:17 pm

"He went ahead without thought or authority, quote 'even though they had known each other for years'."

It reminds me of the several episodes which we now know about the history of those Royal Marines (Who dares wins) sent out to the Middle East and elsewhere to "assist" friendly Rulers on the understanding that their activities were "deniable" as having nothing to do with the British Government.

by trevorw2539 Thu May 31, 2012 8:42 pm

At the end of all this Leveson will come out with a report. I guarantee you one thing. Whatever is in that report some of you will agree with it, some of you will be half-hearted about it and the rest will be completely sceptical.
Reading the posts on here, and watching the Inquiry when possible, has proved interesting. Each has seen something different in the attitudes of the various witnesses and the 'inquisitor'. Various posters have picked up on various topics that have attracted them in particular. Most of us have started from different points in the whole affair. Some from TV reports, BBC and ITV, some from Radio, some from Newspapers. All will have formed varying first opinions which will have coloured their attitudes.
It will be interesting to see your varied reactions to the Report.
Personally there's only one thing that I'm interested in. Who was that attractive young lady second from right of... erm perhaps not. Smile

by astra Thu May 31, 2012 8:57 pm

Who was that attractive young lady second from right of... erm perhaps not.

Good man Trevor!!

Keep yer perspective, and priorities are not to be changed.

by trevorw2539 Thu May 31, 2012 9:22 pm

astra wrote:
Who was that attractive young lady second from right of... erm perhaps not.

Good man Trevor!!

Keep yer perspective, and priorities are not to be changed.

Exactly. Always had my eyes open for a pretty.. erm...face Embarassed

.

by Blamhappy Thu May 31, 2012 10:34 pm

trevorw2539 wrote:At the end of all this Leveson will come out with a report. I guarantee you one thing. Whatever is in that report some of you will agree with it, some of you will be half-hearted about it and the rest will be completely sceptical.
Reading the posts on here, and watching the Inquiry when possible, has proved interesting. Each has seen something different in the attitudes of the various witnesses and the 'inquisitor'. Various posters have picked up on various topics that have attracted them in particular. Most of us have started from different points in the whole affair. Some from TV reports, BBC and ITV, some from Radio, some from Newspapers. All will have formed varying first opinions which will have coloured their attitudes.
It will be interesting to see your varied reactions to the Report.
Personally there's only one thing that I'm interested in. Who was that attractive young lady second from right of... erm perhaps not.

Absolutely! I think the majority found Piers Morgan to be slimy and dishonest, but others have definitely attracted varied opinion.

by Blamhappy Thu May 31, 2012 10:35 pm

I noticed a man on the left today who was quite sexy-looking.

by sickchip Fri Jun 01, 2012 12:31 am

I had noticed you prefered your men on the left, Blam......it's quite obvious that you don't
like the chaps on the right. Wink

by anfieldspirit Fri Jun 01, 2012 2:09 am

The key question posed by Jay QC was around the issue of bias, in that Cable was removed due to bias against - and yet Hunt was appointed despite clear bias for. Which was either crass stupidity/incompetence by Cameron, or a cynical move to ensure smooth passage for the Murdoch bid (not expecting the whole issue to be scrutinised at a future point!!). The emails/txts/meetings that Hunt was involved in are indefensible, as is his treatment of his SPAD. I believe he showed (some) remorse for the way Adam Smith was treated - but if he was an honourable person, he would have stepped down weeks ago. His testimony was riddled with inconsistency and fudge (I agree with Phil Hornby's assessment above) and I wish I could have gotten a £1 every time he mention 'superfast broadband'!! Sorry folks, he has to go, and if there were any justice or propriety in this farce - closely followed by the gurning lightweight Cameron.........and breathe!!

by Mel Fri Jun 01, 2012 7:51 am

anfieldspirit. Welcome to the forum.

Excellent post sir.

by sickchip Fri Jun 01, 2012 8:21 am

We appear to have two threads discussing this now! My dilemma - where to post?

Having just made a point on the 'tory scandal' thread, I'm tempted to repeat it here?? scratch

by skwalker1964 Fri Jun 01, 2012 8:51 am

The neck of these Tories never fails to amaze me. In clear contradiction of all the evidence they're running a PR campaign now to make Hunt whiter than white.

There's no question he went over the line in dealing with the BSkyb issue - but absolutely no doubt whatever that he misled Parliament on more than one occasion. And that alone is enough to mean he has to resign or be sacked.

by Sponsored content