- Concerns had been raised after Hunt gave newspaper interview prejudging situation
- Hunt had ignored advice over how to handle Murdoch's bid to control BSkyB
- Culture Secretary overruled advice to refer bid to Competition Commission
By Jason Groves, Tim Shipman and Michael Seamark
|
Riding for a fall: Culture Secreatry Jeremy Hunt is coming under close scrutiny
David Cameron ignored legal advice that allowing Jeremy Hunt to rule on Rupert Murdoch’s £8billion bid for BSkyB risked ‘prejudging the affair’ in the tycoon’s favour.
The Prime Minister’s chief of staff Ed Llewellyn received the warning on the very day Culture Secretary Mr Hunt was appointed to replace the Business Secretary Vince Cable, who had been secretly recorded boasting he had ‘declared war’ on the Murdochs.
Patrick Kilgariff, legal director at the Department of Culture, Media and Sport, raised concerns about a newspaper interview Mr Hunt had given the previous June.
In it, he said: ‘It does seem to me that News Corp do control Sky already, so it isn’t clear to me that in terms of media plurality there is a substantive change but I do not want to second guess what regulators might decide.’
Mr Kilgariff, whose warning came in an email released by the Leveson Inquiry yesterday, said Mr Hunt’s comments were ‘not helpful and tends towards an element of prejudging the issues’.
Mr Kilgariff had warned Mr Hunt the previous month that it would be ‘unwise’ for him to lobby Mr Cable over the decision.
The inquiry heard yesterday that Mr Hunt repeatedly ignored official advice over the handling of Rupert Murdoch’s bid to seize control of BSkyB.
Documents lodged with Leveson reveal that the embattled Culture Secretary overruled a warning to refer the bid to the Competition Commission â€" a process Mr Murdoch was desperate to avoid.
It also emerged that in 2010, before he was put in charge of deciding whether the bid should go ahead, he was explicitly told not to lobby other ministers on the issue.
Lawyers told him in no uncertain terms that it could leave the Government open to legal challenges over what was supposed to be a quasi-judicial decision.
But just a week later he sent an email to David Cameron lavishing praise on the bid and urging him to set up a meeting with Business Secretary Vince Cable, who was then in charge of deciding the issue.
The Prime Minister threw Mr Hunt a lifeline yesterday, insisting that he had acted ‘impartially’ in the matter.
He said: ‘I don’t regret giving the job to Jeremy Hunt â€" it was the right thing to do in the circumstances, which weren’t of my making. And the crucial point is, did Jeremy Hunt carry out his role properly, with respect to BSkyB? And I believe that he did.’
Mr Cameron, who is expected to face the inquiry next month, insisted there was no ‘conspiracy’ between the Murdochs and elements of the Government.
Controversial: Jeremy Hunt, left, was put in charge of dealing with BSkyB bid by David Cameron, right, after Vince Cable lost the role
The Prime Minister said he was ‘looking forward to giving evidence’, as was Mr Hunt, so ‘all of this will be out in the open’.
But the fresh revelations will add to the pressure on the Culture Secretary to quit. Yesterday it was announced that he will give evidence to the inquiry on Thursday â€" effectively giving him six days to save his political career.
Labour stepped up calls for Mr Hunt to quit. Deputy leader Harriet Harman said: ‘David Cameron might think that he can brazen ly say no regrets and this will somehow draw a line under it but people will not accept that.
‘It was evident that he gave the decision on the Murdoch bid to Jeremy Hunt when he knew Jeremy Hunt was not impartially judging the bid but was in favour of the bid.’
Admission: Adam Smith admitted his contacts with News Corp were too close
In other developments yesterday:Â
- It emerged that Murdoch fixer Fred Michel had at least two meetings in Downing Street while the BSkyB bid was being considered â€" one with Mr Cameron’s top adviser Steve Hilton and another with Nick Clegg’s press secretary Lena Pietsch. He was also invited to join a delegation accompanying Mr Cameron to India.
- A slew of emails and text messages revealed Mr Michel enjoyed extraordinary access to the heart of government â€" exchanging dozens of chatty messages with Mr Hunt and close advisers to Mr Cameron, Mr Clegg and the Chancellor George Osborne.
- The top civil servant in the Department of Culture Media and Sport (DCMS) said Mr Hunt’s adviser Adam Smith had been drawn into ‘a web of manipulation and exaggeration’ by Mr Michel. Jonathan Stephens said the ‘number, extent, depth and tone’ of Mr Smith’s contacts with Mr Michel ‘went beyond what was acceptable’.
- Lord Justice Leveson described the affair as a ‘calamity’ for the DCMS, and urged the Government to hold a review of the role of special advisers.
- Tony Blair was called to give evidence to the inquiry on Monday. The former prime minister, who is godfather to one of Rupert Murdoch’s children, will be quizzed on his own close links to the Murdoch empire while in government.
Perhaps the most damaging evidence yesterday came in documents lodged by Jonathan Stephens, permanent secretary at the DCMS.
A memo sent to Mr Hunt in preparation for a meeting with James Murdoch in January last year tell s him he has virtually no choice but to refer the BSkyB bid to the Competition Commission.
A report by the media regulator Ofcom had advised Mr Hunt to refer the bid. The memo advises him to tell Mr Murdoch: ‘I find it very difficult on the basis of what I have seen to date to see any grounds which would allow me to not refer this case to the Competition Commission.’Â
In a section which is underlined for emphasis, the note says the Murdochs would have to ‘identify some very serious flaws in Ofcom’s facts or analysis’.
But the Murdochs were desperate to avoid a referral, which they feared would derail the bid. In the event Mr Hunt effectively overruled his officials and negotiated a deal with the Murdochs which meant the bid was never referred.
Mr Hunt has been accused of misleading Parliament after it emerged he had written to the Prime Minister in November 2010 urging him to intervene with Mr Cable, who was thought to be opposed to the bid.
The memo appears to conflict with his assurance to MPs in April this year that he had made ‘absolutely no interventions seeking to influence a quasi-judicial decision that was at the time the responsibility of the Secretary of State for Business’.
Yesterday it emerged that officials had also warned him to keep out of the process. An official memo sent to Mr Hunt a week before his intervention said he had ‘no role’ and said he should ‘not have any external discussions on the BSkyB media merger’.
It warned that interfering in the bid ‘carries risks to the robustness of the decision’.
-
How the Wild West REALLY looked: Gorgeous sepia-tinted... -
Parents' outrage after girl flashes her naked crotch under... -
Millionaire on the run: How the man who founded software... -
Honour student who works two jobs to support her siblings... -
Beautiful flowers? Look a little closer and you'll see these... -
Man goes to hospital with a kidney stone... and discovers... -
When skydiving goes very wrong: Pensioner, 80, left hanging... -
Robert Kennedy Jr 'had an affair with jilted wife of his... -
Casey Anthony 'piles on the pounds after months of sitting... -
Doctored photo in Hustler magazine of conservative... -
So why does the Queen never sneeze in public? Mail has a... -
Woman stuns tourists by walking topless round Manhattan
Share this article:
Here's what other readers have said. Why not add your thoughts, or debate this issue live on our message boards.
The comments below have not been moderated.
- Newest
- Oldest
- Best rated
- Worst rated
Looking at the latest reports that Hunt sometimes addressed Michel as 'Mon Ami' and 'Daddy', in text messages, one can only wonder why Cameron is so wary of sacking him. It is astonishing that he is still in post, after all this, and it will be interesting as more comes out. Perhaps Hunt knows where too many 'bodies are buried'?
Report abuse
We see in India top political bosses who give active clearance for various acts are shielded from just results of their acts of commission and omission. Others who may be in the know of facts are protected until the over worked Supreme Court intervenes. Even then many blocks are paced in the investigation. UK also seems to be following the same routine. Your PM seems to be as honest as ours.
Report abuse
The views expressed in the contents above are those of our users and do not necessarily reflect the views of MailOnline.
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar