Category Archives: media

links to where my stories are published

Exclusive: Police re-open investigation into London political paedo ring

Posted on by

Elm-Guest-House (1)

ELm House Guest House,Barnes as it is now : Picture courtesy: Exaro News

Exaro News ( http://www.exaronews.com) today reveals that for the last two months the police have secretly been scoping a new investigation into senior politicians and their involvement in a paedophile ring, involving  under age boys, that took place in the 1980s.

This is separate to the current Operation Yewtree  investigation into Jimmy Savile and other celebrities, which mainly involves under age girls.

They are looking again at a raid that took place in 1982 on a  guest house in Barnes, south London, which appeared to be being used as a gay brothel and was frequented by prominent figures including, I am told, ministers, Tory MPs, a Liberal MP and two Labour Mps. Under age boys in  the care  of Richmond council and other local authorities were  visiting or staying at the guest house.

The inquiry-under the title Operation Fairbank – will also examine whether there was a cover up which meant that the Met Police at the time and when complaints about it resurfaced twenty years later  never followed up the investigation. Nobody was ever charged with any offence, even though the place had been raided and people bundled into police cars.

The place – 27, Rocks Lane  in Barnes – is now a very respectable and none of the people living there now having to do with events when it was the Elm House guest house between 1979 and 1982.

Exaro News was put on to this inquiry by a former Richmond Council official and trade unionist and we took him to give evidence to the police who were already investigating similar allegations passed to Tom Watson, the Labour MP. He raised the issue of the 1980s paedo ring in the Commons.

Exaro News will be covering this scandal over the next few days, starting today, and are still investigating, these, and other more serious allegations in other parts of the country. I shall be blogging in more   detail about the difficulties facing the police in handling such a difficult and fraught investigation.

Suffice to say anybody who believes that Tom Watson has raised this issue for pure political gain and this is  a fabricated story better  think again very carefully. I know it has very wide ramifications and could  lead to a scandal even bigger than the hacking inquiry.

My Political Journalist of the Year Award: Praise be the Whitehall moles

Posted on by
Revealed: My secret source in Whitehall Pic Credit:BBC

Revealed: My secret source in Whitehall Pic Credit:BBC

Today I am really thrilled to win Political Journalist of  the Year Press Gazette awards for Exaro News -award  last night.

But the real tribute should go to a couple of fearless Whitehall moles who put me on the trail of the story  of massive tax avoidance at the heart of Whitehall.

While journalists must never reveal  their sources, there is at least one good tip from this for journos pursuing questionable deals done in Whitehall.

And it came from first source. He was the originator of the suggestion that senior people in Whitehall had set up  highly complicated arrangements to avoid paying any tax and national insurance. And he had heard a rumour  that one of the most grotesque examples was a recent appointment to the top job at the Students Loan Company. A left of centre character who firmly believed in the ethos of public service  he was worried that Whitehall was being corrupted by the widespread tax avoidance. We now know it is rife.

But rather than leak information which breaks the Whitehall rules we devised a different strategy. Between us we drafted a targeted freedom of information request to the Student loans Company and Vince Cable’s Department for Business  which would make it very difficult for either department to deny. During our meetings at various hostelries across London – I won’t divulge his favourite malt  in case the Whitehall thought police try to trace him- we developed the story.

Sure enough after a suitable interval back came some 60 pages of complicated e-mail traffic between Bis, the Student Loans Company, the Cabinet Office and more surprising, the outside advice from private management consultants – one paper was volunteered because they were worried we would distort their opinions – and even letters from Revenue and Customs approving the arrangement. We spent further hours  at certain hostelries analysing the results which were far worse than he thought. We spent much more time chasing up every conceivable angle before Exaro and BBC Newsnight  were ready to go with the tale.

The result was immediate. Ed Lester, the head of the Student Loans Company, had his tax arrangement stopped and Danny Alexander, chief secretary to the Treasury who had personally approved his salary had to admit he didn’t even spot the tax avoidance. He ordered a Whitehall wide inquiry.

But it was not all over.  The inquiry identified 2500 civil servants on similar deals. But had they gone too far? Enter a new mole from another part of Whitehall.  Seeing Danny Alexander’s letter to George Osborne he was furious. He felt Alexander had caught too many in his net, including genuine freelances  having bona fide reasons for working this way. This guy, a mischievous right of centre social libertarian character who enjoy’s Guido Fawkes blog, decided the world should know before Danny had a chance. Hence another story for Exaro News and BBC Newsnight.

One might feel sorry for Danny – damned if he doesn’t, damned if he does. Except of course while we all suffer his cuts  paradoxically he has never been so wealthy in his life as a Cabinet minister. And he has lots of  dinners with his chum. George Osborne.

Good for him though in ordering the inquiry. But the greatest thing of all is that he couldn’t cover this up even if he wanted to – thanks to the use of freedom of information. No wonder Jack Straw and Tony Blair now regret giving the public and journos the chance to find out what is really going on government.

The bonkers logic of “Life of Brian” Leveson

Posted on by
Lord Justice Leveson: Bonkers logic

Lord Justice Leveson: Bonkers logic

Now I have been given carte blanche by the Leveson inquiry to write what I want on blogs without any regulation I am going to take full advantage with some tough words for this judge on his lack of logic.

Like Lord Hutton before him who exonerated Labour over Iraq his report exonerates the current great and good in government and the media bosses from blame for the current crisis. Jeremy Hunt, the culture secretary, is cleared of bias over Murdoch;  News International’s Rebekah Brooks of undue lobbying of Cameron over the McCann inquiry or anything else; Cameron and his government of any  favours deal with the  Murdochs and the police of widespread corruption. Cameron can be trusted to introduce reforms to make sure  public perception is changed.

But go further into this report – see http://www.exaronews.com today.  Go to Volume Four and Appendix Five – and get one of the most devastating critiques of the incestuous relationship between top politicians and the media I have ever read from a High Court judge in my 26 years of political journalism.

Unlike Hutton he really puts the boot in. Here and I quote he attacks what he calls the ” inappropriate  closeness” between media bosses and successive governments not just now – but for over 35 years. Thatcher, Major, Blair, Brown and Cameron are all indicted in a damning charge sheet.

He baldly states “ politicians have conducted themselves in a way that I do consider has not served the public interest”.

He accuses them of being vulnerable to unaccountable interests, missing clear opportunities to address  public concern about the culture, practices and ethics of the press and  seeking “ to control ( if not manipulate) the supply of news and information to the public in return for expected or hoped-for favourable treatment by sections of the press.”

He concluded that all this gave rise to “legitimate perceptions and concerns that politicians and the press have traded power and influence in ways which are contrary to the public interest and out of public sight. These perceptions and concerns are inevitably particularly acute in relation to the conduct by politicians of public policy issues in relations to the press itself.”

Now where does he get that view. By page 1971  as a good judge he cites his sources. And guess who gets reams of footnotes, one, Rebekah Brooks, from the McCann inquiry to Brown ,Blair and Cameron – the very person in the main part of the report is absolved from dirty deals!

Perhaps I have misread this million word treatise –  Brian Leveson is  actually auditioning for a Monty Python script or to help revive Bremner, Bird and Fortune for Channel Four.

His other glaring lack of logic is the treatment of the internet as of no consequence. I have a sneaking suspicion he thinks the internet is tun by techy teenage geeks playing war games and mad loud mouths. In fact it is now becoming a powerful antidote and rival to the dead tree press as a forum for discussion and breaking news. The battle for future generation politics is being fought  between Owen Jones and Harry Cole  on-line every day.  And there would be no way this small one man blog would get 158,000 plus hits in less than three years if the internet has been ineffectual.

On the main issue of  regulation or no regulation, I am reserving judgement. My heart is with those who argue that a free press is just that, a free press. My head is revolted by the despicable practices of some of the tabloid bosses who may well now go to prison. I applaud  the idea of a journalist’s conscience clause and his views on treatment of women and people from ethnic minorities and a new  arbitration service that will give justice to Joe Public as well multi-millionaires. But I want to see what this new press act will look like before going down the road to statutory backing. Let debate begin.

Leveson: Did Rebekah Brooks force Cameron to set up the McCann Inquiry?

Posted on by

Rebekah Brooks: Powerful enough to change the PM’s mind?

Thursday’s Leveson report could  form a judgement on whether  News International was such a powerful force in the land that the Prime Minister had to do its bidding.

I know for a fact that Lord Leveson has been exercised  over whether the inquiry got to the real truth over the sequence of events that led to the setting up of the Metropolitan Police inquiry at a cost of £2.5m  into the disappearance of Madeleine McCann. Those keen to follow the full sequence of events should go to the Exaro News website at http://www.exaronews.com  for a series of stories on the issue published today.

What becomes clear after talking to a number of players close to the event is that the situation was far from straightforward and involved more than just Rebekah Brooks making her views known to David Cameron.

The scenario includes direct meetings between News International executives and the Number Ten press office during the week The Sun published Kate McCann’s memoirs in May 2011. News International is not denying these meetings, Number Ten is talking of unspecified inaccuracies about who met who and what was said.

What is absolutely clear is that until The Sun published the direct plea for an inquiry on its front page, the Home office had absolutely no intention of setting up let alone funding such an inquiry. So was it the case of ” It was The Sun that did it “? If it was it has enormous implications for the running of this country.

Let me make it clear I am not blaming the McCanns for pressing for this – what mother and father who had gone through hell over the disappearance of a child – would not want everything done for them.

I am more interested in the Leveson view expressed by Robert Jay, counsel to the inquiry, when he said to Rebekah Brooks during the hearing was ” a case study in the exercise of power.”

The Evil Empire that wants to destroy and tax the free internet

Posted on by

Darth Vader or Vladimir Putin? Pic courtesy: http://www.downwithfilm.com

Bloggers beware. A group of the world’s  repressive regimes have teamed up with greedy telecommunications companies to form one unholy alliance. Their aim is to restrict who can access the internet and to milk and tax the billions of people who already use it.

No, this is not science fiction, it is fact ,despite my illustration. And the first steps are going to made at a UN  conference in Dubai next month.

The plotters are at a meeting of an extraordinary obscure and secretive UN body called the International Telecommunications Union. Its remit until now has been to police such quaint inventions like telegrams and international landline telephones. It now wants to extend its remit to the internet.

It is being hijacked by a number of the world’s most repressive regimes as a  body to control who can access the internet and how much they can be charged.

The Evil Empire of countries behind this move include China, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Syria  and sadly after the Arab spring, Egypt. Hardly paragons of  human rights these countries are canvassing over 80 other developing countries, including African and Asian dictatorships, to back a  new UN Treaty legitimising the right of governments` to limit who can access the internet. Using Orwellian language they want only “rational” people to have access and the power to refuse them an IP  address or block any e-mails or communications sent to them.

But there is a further twist. A group of  unnamed European telecommunications companies want to profit from this by introducing charges for using the net, including sending e-mails and talking on Skype being well aware that the decline in post and international calls  means the end of an income stream. And the repressive regimes are also interested in introducing a tax on free country users. Called the ” Sender Pays” model it will mean if your blog  or e-mail was read by anybody in Russia, Iran  you will would be sent a tax bill or charge.

This ” Tweet Tax” will inhibit communication and price out citizens from using the net.

To check this out see the conference site at http://www.itu.int/ and  go for the section on the World conference on International Communications. Click on documents and you will see the submissions but be blocked for accessing them. These include submissions from Israel, Tunisia, Cuba and Cameroon to name a few. You can read on the public views  and opinions section  the Centre for Democracy and Technology submission which will give you a clue. But don’t try direct  at http://www.itu.int/en/wcit-12 or you will be blocked!

It is not pretty reading.

Worse although I gather it is opposed by the United States – no country can have a veto over this treaty. And countries like the UK which is looking at a new draft communications bill to collect details of people on the internet – are actually creating a system which will allow repressive regimes to tax you by allowing the Revenue and Customs to pass your details to them.The UK does not appear to have submitted anything to protest about this. New Zealand has – as this report shows – see http://m.nbr.co.nz/opinion/nz-will-vote-against-un-taking-control-internet …

Hardly anyone seems to have spotted this and we are  less than a fortnight away from the conference. But a campaign and petition has been launched by the TUC with the backing of the International Trade Union Confederation and they held a press conference about it last week – which received virtually no coverage. If you want to back it – the links are  www.tuc.org.uk/stopthenetgrab.

Details of the petition by the ITUC  are at: http://www.change.org/petitions/stop-the-net-grab.

See my article in Tribune.

I am amazed that no-one  has taken this up.  You would think  the Huffington Post or  Political Home, or bloggers like  Guido Fawkes,  might be alarmed about this. I for one can’t see  Lord Ashcroft or Paul Staines willingly paying over taxes to Russia or Iran collected by our Revenue and Customs because someone overseas has reads their blog or received an e-mail.

And I see nothing public from think tanks like Compass, Policy Exchange, and the Taxpayers Alliance, objecting to this.

As has been said many times the defence of liberty needs eternal vigilance. This attack on internet freedom transcends the Left and the Right and is as big a threat to free speech as any nasty dictator.

BBC Newsnight:This hysterical media frenzy must not obscure the real child abuse story

Posted on by

BBC Newsnight; Frenzy could obscure the real child abuse issue Pic Courtesy:BBC

Prompted by the mass media interest in the North Wales child sexual abuse scandal last week  I was asked on the Today programme whether I  thought there was a witch hunt against  leading Tory figures. I said No.

If I was asked the same question about a witch hunt  this week, I would say unhesitatingly say yes. But not against Tory politicians, against the BBC and the cause of investigative journalism.

Don’t get me wrong I am appalled by the shoddy journalism that meant a paedophile victim was not shown a photo of his alleged perpetrator – whether he would be named or not – and the scandal that followed the naming of the unfortunate Lord McAlpine across the internet.(see original Guardian story –   http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/nov/08/mistaken-identity-tory-abuse-claim).

Anybody in touch with reality should know that when the victim was a young vulnerable person in a care home  he would be very unlikely to know the names of any Tory politicians. Ask any young person today , and unless they are a political nerd like me, they are more likely to be able to name the Man U and Chelsea front bench than be able to tell  you any of the names of  Dave Cameron’s  coalition Cabinet. And I am puzzled why a much better researched programme on Jimmy Saville was not broadcast..

What is alarming me  is the media hysteria surrounding this. Journalists are natural gossips,nervy, adrenalin fuelled, and totally obsessed with the workings of their own trade. Joe Public, while  naturally alarmed that organisation like the BBC should get such a major fact wrong – and rightly unhappy that an elderly senior politician should be traduced in this way, is by no means so obsessed.

The resignation of the BBC director general should allow the BBC to put its top-heavy chain of command in order and get a proper grip on the way it commissions its investigative journalism work. As readers of this blog will know I am not an uncritical fan of the Beeb, previous blogs attacked it for wasting money on moving offices, its failure to be properly accountable to Parliament, and its tax affairs. I did not call it the British Tax Avoidance Corporation for nothing.

However the idea that everyone in Newsnight is as dead as a dodo is frankly nonsense.  My own experience in bringing with Exaro News  an outside story about the scandal of the tax avoidance practice surrounding the appointment of Ed Lester, the head of the Student Loans Company, gives a  different impression. Peter Rippon, the then editor and a young producer, Robin Punt ( now on loan to BBC South East ) could not have been more thorough and  Robin was prepared to spend hours examining the hoard of  Whitehall documents which disclosed the scandal. They could not have been more professional. Nor were they fazed that the BBC would come under the spotlight for the same thing I was investigating, they were interested in the story. And it proved right, sparking a government investigation exposing 2500 others.

But my main complaint is something else. We are still in the middle of a very serious investigation into what  happened to a lot of very vulnerable young  people and whether they were used for the sexual gratification of older men while they were in the care of the community.

I firmly believe that by no means everything has come out about this troubled period in the 1980s and 1990s but I am not going to speculate while I am still gathering evidence. There is certainly enough to prove that people did raise this appalling spectre not just in North Wales and it was known to the authorities. But it is too early yet to point fingers at particular perpetrators.

It is vitally important that people who know about this and the victims can come forward with the confidence to  talk to the police. It is a  valid role for journalists to investigate this area – not least because we are the one group of people who have the time and ability to tell this sad story. Also the very knowledge that journalists – and in this case Mps like Tom Watson –  are determined to get to the bottom of this matter – often spurs the authorities to keep digging  because we won’t go away.

There is another reason. That the care system allowed this to happen is appalling. If the stories of some of the victims are true, it is a life damaging criminal act and a betrayal of trust. But as the  Newsnight debacle shows it must be accurate and it must not trash the reputations of other people.

Today’s care system also needs reform after the appalling grooming scandal in Rochdale. Have we learnt anything and could this happen now?

If I want anything out of this I want social workers, local government officials, the police  and the perpetrators of such foul deeds to think twice before either condoning or participating. I want them to think like many politicians do already ” what would this be like if this was published on the front page of  The Sun, the Daily Mail, The Guardian or leading the BBC News?”. And then not do this or blow the whistle on such dark deeds.

Chris Grayling: A Despicable Political Thug and Mugger

Posted on by

Chris Grayling? Pic courtesy:The Sun

Update: The cuts in criminal injuries compensation came will come into force  on Tuesday November 27. You know which MPs to  blame by logging on to the link below.

Labour’s attempt to block these horrendous cuts being imposed by Chris Grayling and Helen Grant  was  defeated on Wednesday November 7  by 289 votes to 209 – with Tory and Liberal Democrat MPs rushing into the lobbies to support the cuts. A new passionate supporter of the cuts emerged – former prisons minister Crispin Blunt – who admitted the cuts were being made so victims of crime pay their share of the deficit. And he claimed David Cameron supported this move.

Helen Grant defended the removal of compensation to children and adults attacked by illegal breed dogs and dogs owners could not control them – by saying motorists did not have to compensate people they accidently ran over. Other speakers who backed the change included David Burrowes, Conservative MP for Enflield, southgate and Nick de Bois, Conservative MP for Enflield, North.

See full list of MPs who blocked Labour ‘s opposition here: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmhansrd/cm121107/debtext/121107-0004.htm

Portrait of a nasty political mugger Pic courtesy: The Sun

One of the most despicable decisions coalition was taken last week in Parliament. But you won’t have read it in the papers.

Chris Grayling, the Justice Secretary, and chief advocate of the law and order brigade of the Tory Party decided that muggers, rioters , thugs, burglars,and thieves who maim their victims can now safely do this in the knowledge  that the injured person won’t get a penny of compensation from the state. And many more seriously injured people will get their compensation cut.

Chris Grayling mugging the innocent public? Pic Courtesy; thief.org.uk

And just to make sure the victims really squirm –  if their injuries mean they can’t go to work for more than six months they won’t get their loss of earnings made up by the state – they’ll have to live on a minimal state benefit of £85.85 a week. Those victims who have not been in full time work for three years will be considered shirkers and won’t get a penny. And if the NHS can’t give you any counselling, forget it, you’ll have to pay privately, Grayling has withdrawn any payments to private providers.

This wonderful new version of compassionate Conservatism is brill news for the criminal classes and bad news for victims. For while rightly he is making criminals contribute to the taxpayer funded compensation scheme – some of the injuries innocent members of the public suffer at the hands of muggers won’t qualify for compensation.

Let me spell it out in graphic terms. If a thug breaks your jaw or  fingers , cuts off one of your toes,burns your hand with a cigarette, breaks your ribs,impairs your speech, you’ll no longer get any compensation. Mr Grayling in a private letter to Tory MPs defends such damage as ” emotional” and not worth any compensation.

If your assailant causes some permanent brain damage , punctures your lungs,  smashes your elbow or knee ,Mr Grayling thinks your compensation should be cut by up to 60 per cent. A mugger has to rape you and permanently reduce you to a paraplegic state for life  for you get the full compensation.Even that has its qualifications. Don’t believe me – see  the list at http://bit.ly/RKvxPX 

If you can’t control your dog or have an illegal breed and  it attacks a child or a postman the injured person can’t claim any state compensation either. These payments are described as ” anomolous ” by Mr Grayling. This  comes at a time when another ministry, Defra, is trying to tighten up the law on dangerous dogs. And all because Grayling is worried that the criminal injuries compensation scheme is costing too much and he must save £4m a month. The changes are fully debated in an excellent House of Commons research paper – see http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN06451.

But there something even worse about this sick decision which shows why Grayling is on par with the criminals he says he loathes.

Rather than openly get this debated in the House of Commons – which you might expect given the consequences for the general public – he chose to get it through Parliament by using an obscure regulatory committee – with the result that not a single lobby correspondent noticed it was happening.

John Redwood; Decent Tory silenced by Grayling Pic courtesy:getwokingham.co.uk

This is the equivalent of  a mugger or rapist using a dark alleyway to ply their trade -knowing if it was done in broad daylight many more people will notice. But he is even worse than that. When this was last debated a number of loyal Tory MPs, notably ex-minister, John Redwood, and Angie Bray refused to support it – they have been silenced by their removal from the committee scrutinising it.

Like any  common gangster he recruited loyal gang members – people desperate to get promoted into ministerial  jobs – to do his dirty work. He wasn’t even there when the deed was done.

Helen Grant; From respectable solicitor to political gangster’s moll?: Pic Courtesy: Helen Grant MP website

Instead he  used his deputy Helen Grant, like a gangster’s moll, to push through the changes last Thursday with the help of  a Tory whip, four parliamentary private secretaries to Tory and Liberal Democrat ministers, a Tory Party vice chairman and a wimpish president of the Liberal Democrats.

Indeed so incensed am I about this that I am going to list all their e-mail addresses in the hope that they get a verbal mugging. I don’t believe in physical violence- but they deserve a stern magisterial dressing down for mugging the British public. (see e-mails at end)

They guilty gang are: Helen Grant  (Conservative Justice Minister, Maidstone & Weald); Rebecca Harris (Conservative, Castle Point); John Howell (Conservative, Henley, PPS to Andrew Lansley); Jessica Lee (Conservative, Erewash, PPS to Dominic Grieve); Tessa Munt (Liberal Democrat, Wells, PPS to Vince Cable); Bob Neill (Conservative Party Vice-Chairman & new member of Justice Committee, Bromley & Chislehurst); and Lee Scott (Conservative, Ilford North, PPS to Chris Grayling)  Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North); David Evennett (Conservative, Bexleyheath & Crayford, Government Whip);

The hapless wimpo Liberal Democrat who stood by at the scene of the crime is  Tim Farron (President of the Liberal Democrats,Westmorland & Lonsdale) .

Labour  members to their credit, led by Rob  Flello, Labour’s justice minister, opposed the move and those against it included David Blunkett, the former home secretary.

Of course Mr Grayling won’t be worried personally by any changes – his work routine avoids meeting any potential muggers outside the House – and he has a government provided chauffeur driven car to take him from his large well guarded detached home in Ashstead, Surrey to London.

The email addresses are: helen.grant.mp@parliament.uk, rebecca.harris.mp@parliament.uk  howelljm@parliament.uk , jessica.lee@parliament.uk, tessa.munt.mp@parliament.uk ,bob.neill.mp@parliament.uk, scottle@parliament.uk michael.ellis.mp@parliament.uk, david.evennett.mp @parliament.uk.

And the abstaining Lib Dem is tim@timfarron.co.uk .

But perhaps you should complain direct to Chris Grayling. His e-mail is chris.grayling.mp@parliament.uk.

Should ministers be able to snoop on your calls and e-mails? Enter a competition to have your say.

Posted on by

computer snoopers? pic courtesy itelegraph.co.uk

Update: Since this was published the deadline has been extended to December 14, so you still have a chance to enter.

Can you out Craig  John Craig on Sky News? Are you more outrageous than blogger  Guido Fawkes?  Can you be more angry than Richard Littlejohn or Peter Hitchens? If you are a budding journo aged 14 to 18 and take an interest in politics, there is rather good competition you can enter. The subject this year is privacy and the internet – and whether  the government should be able to access stuff on your mobile phone calls, trace your e-mails and see which websites you have visited. The competition is run by the Parliamentary Press Gallery – the hacks who write for the press, write blogs and broadcast on radio and TV from Parliament. You must have a view on this – so why not write an article or a blog or put together a radio or TV report.

You can get all the details at http://www.writenow.org.uk  . But hurry you only have until November 10 to get an entry in. If you win you will get a day in the House of Political Intrigue and be able to meet some of the more colourful characters in the media and MPs.

Press Complaints Commission: defending legitimate journalism

Posted on by

Lord Hunt: Current chairman of the Press Complaints Commission: pic courtesy: The Guardian

It may be unfashionable to say this right now,but this is a blog to say how well and fair the Press Complaints Commission handled a complaint against me this summer.

I was not even a party to the complaint which was between Matt Sprake, a former police photographer, and the Independent Newspaper but the content of his entire complaint was against me over a story that appeared under my name and Oliver Wright which I had researched and published on Exaro  News . (see http://www.exaronews.net for full story and pcc’s findings).

Basically  through Exaro News we revealed  how Sprake’s picture agency, NewsPics, offered to pay thousands of pounds to public officials – from nurses to police workers – for inside information on celebrities. Sprake denied he had ever paid anyone.

The offer was made explicitly on the agency’s website.

Matt Sprake: PIc courtesy of Hacked Off website

The disclosure led to Sprake being summoned by Lord Leveson to appear before his inquiry and provide information on the huge scale of his  work for Trinity Mirror which Lloyd Embley, then editor of the People, had omitted to tell them.

Sprate lodged a complaint to the PCC claiming that  breached the editors’ code of conduct. He claimed that the article contained inaccuracies and intruded into his private life, and that I had used subterfuge to gain information about his past career in the police.

The PCC dismissed each element of Sprake’s complaint particularly suggestions that his family had been put at risk by the disclosure that he had photographed terrrorist sites. The findings said:

“He considered that the information relating to his former employment by Scotland Yard in anti-terrorism activities was sensitive and confidential.”

But the PCC concludes: “The complainant had volunteered information about his former work with the police, including that he had been ‘looking at terrorism work’, to the journalist, whom he had taken to be a potential client, and was a stranger to him; and that the information amounted to a statement of his former occupation.

“In addition, in light of the statement published on the website, which suggested police officers contacted the company with information, and the on-going public scrutiny and debate over the links between the police and the Press, there was a public interest in revealing the complainant’s former work with the police.”

Sprake also complained that I had tricked him in a telephone conversation into revealing his past career in the police. The PCC said that Sprake was confused about the purpose of the reporter’s telephone call to him, but concludes: “The commission could not therefore agree that the reporter had engaged in misrepresentation or subterfuge.”

Sprake was asked for comment on the findings and he said: “None at all.”

Now the good  and fair thing  about this judgement is that the PCC did not fall for such sweeping complaints from someone who had already admitted to Leveson about how he pursued the McCanns seeking intrusive photos when they had not wanted them on a  Canadian holiday. But I also had to justify  everything I had written – and had kept a recording of the call. The whole point of chasing him up was to allow him to give me his side and to be absolutely certain from his own words that he was an ex  police photographer.

The irony about all this is that PCC is certain to be abolished by Leveson in its present form because of the ” phone hacking ” scandal. Yet they have handled this well. Whatever  replaces the PCC must both safeguard the public from the worst excesses of bad  and inaccurate journalism  but equally protect  genuine investigative  journalism from unfounded claims from unscrupulous complainants. Over to you, my Lord.

Sex and Violence: The different treatment of Tory councillors Holmes and Coleman

Posted on by

Arrested and bailed; Brian Coleman

Last night Brian Coleman, the infamous former chair of the London fire authority and advocate of  mass privatisation, was arrested by police on suspicion of common assault after an incident outside a parade of shops in North Finchley.

He has been given police bail pending further inquiries into the alleged assault on  Buzz  cafe owner, Helen Michael, who fought a strong campaign against his privatised parking scheme during Coleman’s failed attempt to be re-elected as London Assembly member for Barnet and Camden. (See http://snipelondon.com/scoop/brian-coleman-arrested-on-suspicion-of-assault )

By sheer coincidence not many miles away  at St Albans magistrates court comments have been raised following another leading Tory pleading guilty to 23 charges of  creating and viewing child pornography, including  two extreme images. ( seehttp://bit.ly/Qr2osV) He will be sentenced on October 15.

Stephen Holmes, former Mayor of Dacorum and deputy chairman of Hertfordshire  children’s services, was also a leading advocate of Tory privatisation.

Let’s make it clear I am NOT linking the two men – I don’t know even if they know each other – nor suggesting that all privatisers are violent or paedophiles.

The link is to compare what the Conservatives have done about it. Dacorum Tories in Hemel Hempstead  immediately suspended Holmes following his arrest and he stood down as a borough and county councillor BEFORE even going to trial.

Stephen Holmes; Tories acted fast when police arrested him for keeping child pornography

Dacorum Tories are also looking  to appoint an independent ombudsman to look into complaints against councillors – particularly as people are asking what checks the party does when it selects candidates who are supposed to be trustworthy individuals.

Barnet Conservatives seem to indulge Coleman no matter what he says, what he does and who he insults. Given what happened last night it seems to me the Conservatives owe it to the electorate to suspend him from any remaining posts in Barnet and if found guilty they should demand his resignation.

If not Grant Shapps, the new chairman of the Tory Party  who knows all about Coleman, should insist the party takes action.