Category Archives: media

links to where my stories are published

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.

Leveson Inquiry: Do you want to comment on Newspics, Mr Embley ?

Posted on by

Yet another development today in the fast moving Leveson inquiry into press standards. Lord Leveson – following the two blogs by Roy Greenslade in The Guardian and my exposure of Newspics website at http://www.exaronews.com – has invited the former editor of The People, Lloyd Embley, now editor in chief of  the Daily and Sunday Mirror, to comment on Matt Sprake’s evidence.

In a statement to the inquiry he said:” The Inquiry only learnt of the existence of Matthew Sprake very recently, but I am conscious that his evidence last week concerned, in large part, the work which he had been employed to carry out for The People.  Further, it raised issues relating to the responsibilities for the ethical decisions in connection with its commissioning.

Although I recognise that it is now too late to serve a notice under Section 21 of the Act on the editor, Mr Lloyd Embley (who gave evidence during the course of Module 1), should he wish to provide his account of that relationship, dealing with what Mr Sprake has said, I will, of course, consider it..”

It came on the same day the inquiry was told separately by the Scotland Yard chief, Sue Akers, that her bribery investigations were now covering allegations involving the Trinity Mirror group, owner of The People, over payments to prison officers involving Trinity Mirror as well as News International.There is no suggestion whatsoever that Matt Sprake is involved in this investigation.

Trinity Mirror were given the opportunity to comment on the Exaro News revelations about the inducements offered to public officials on Matt Sprake’s Newspics website but declined to take it up. Perhaps they will take more kindly to Lord Leveson’s request.

Full link to Leveson is :http://www.levesoninquiry.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/Transcript-of-Morning-Hearing-23-July-20121.txt

Leveson Inquiry: The unedifying world of Matt Sprake

Posted on by

Matt Sprake in action with the Met

Matt Sprake, the head of Newspics photo agency, whose website was exposed by me on the Exaro News website (http:// www.exaronews.com) and with Oliver Wright on the Independent, put on a bravura show at the Leveson inquiry this week.

He insisted that  the wording on his website offering thousands of pounds to police staff, prison officers, doormen and nurses, for years  for  stuff on celebrity’s private lives had been a “mistake” and had only not been taken down until the exposure by Exaro because his website was ” broken.”

During the rest of the questioning by Robert Jay, the Leveson counsel, and Lord Leveson himself, he tried to portray himself as a ” White knight” fervently checking that any of these informers had not obtained salacious gossip by breaking the law  and making sure that our great tabloids from The People to the News of the World were not so foolish to indict innocent people on their front pages. Unauthorised  snatch photography with morals, so to speak.

He even provided a detailed example where an innocent referee who had engaged the wrath of Alex Ferguson was saved by Sprake’s due diligence from an exposure at a late night party that never took place.

But he has probably dished himself with Leveson over his explanation of the 330 surveillance jobs he has done, mainly for The People and the News of the World and his amoral view  that whatever the scandal was – his sole interest was whether it was true or not and ” morality and ethics” was something left to the editors. I don’t do ethics that’s for someone else, to put it simply .All this has been more eloquently covered today by Roy Greenslade in his Guardian blog – see http://bit.ly/MpYH81 .

What emerged in detail was his treatment of two stories for The People – the chasing up the McCanns on their first private holiday in Canada without Madeline. Evidently it was fine for The People to spend thousands of pounds sending a team of snatch photographers and a reporter  to Canada because in Mr Sprake’s word he was a ” celebrity” and wanted “to keep Madeline’s name in the public mind.” Now  I would think Gerry McCann is the last person to want to  be a celebrity, more a diligent father trying to get to the bottom of his daughter’s tragic disappearance – and if he wanted the publicity, he could have organised a photocall in Heathrow before he went away. Obviously he didn’t and  that wasn’t good enough for Sprate or The People. They were happy enough to invade their privacy on a well-earned holiday for loadsa dosh.

Similarly the ” ethical ” treatment of Andy Hayman, the Met Police chief who is alleged to have had an affair with someone from the Independent Police Complaints Commsision was considered fair game just because there was an inquiry. Did the People or anyone else have a shred of evidence that the inquiry was compromised or that Hayman was after illicit information? No. But it was worth £10,000 to Sprake for the pics. Hayman did resign but  there seem to far more serious allegations about him over the first hacking inquiry years later.

I am backing Roy Greenslade on this one. Mr Embley needs to be summoned by Leveson for further questioning. The need  for this is made more compelling now Roy Greenslade has revealed that the People’s picture editor, Mark Moylan, forgot to tell Leveson  that he did ANY business with Matt Sprake – now revealed as enormous by Sprake himself. See his new post at http://bit.ly/PqViXw.

Meanwhile just 15 or so minutes after I had  finished covering the Leveson inquiry myself I had a phone call on my mobile.

An anonymous friend of Mr ” Ethical , never done anything wrong, guvnor” Sprake warned me to lay off any further inquiries. They named  some  person  they think is supplying me with information that  led to Mr Sprake’s appearance before Leveson. Sorry mate, the steer came from someone else.

They signed off with a cordial affectionate greeting: ” You fucking geek “. Nice circles you move in , ex police snapper Matt Sprake.

Tax Avoidance:Treasury ” We screwed Up”,BBC ” Nothing is wrong.”

Posted on by

Treasury mandarin Sir Nick Macpherson- admitting catalogue of errors Pic Courtesy: BBC

Yesterday Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee had the Treasury, the BBC, Revenue and Customs and local government before them. Subject: How have so many publicly paid figures got away with tax avoidance.

You could not draw more of a distinction between the evidence given by Whitehall and the BBC on the  same issue. There are are detailed reports by me and Mark Conrad on the Exaro news website ( http://www.exaronews.com) about the hearing.

Suffice to say Sir Nick Macpherson, permanent secretary to the Treasury, put his hands up. He admitted ” a catalogue of errors” had led Student Loans Company chief, Ed Lester, to get a £182,000 a year  job with the government and avoid having tax and national insurance deducted at source. Indeed Howard Orme, the financial director of the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills, admitted he originally wanted £260,000 a year to do the job.

The disclosure that 2400 Whitehall staff have personal contracts shocked Sir Nick. He was forthright: “The Treasury had been asking the wrong questions. We were concentrating on value for money and not on the tax implications. We should have looked have looked at the figures more carefully.”

Contrast this with the BBC’s chief financial officer,Zarin Patel, who despite disclosing that the BBC employs a third of staff – some 25,000 – as freelances and admitting that 148 of the 467 journalist talent are paid through personal service companies, thought there was no tax avoidance at all.

Patel said: “There is no difference to the HMRC whatever way this is done.” In other words it doesn’t matter.

Not a view shared by the committee, Margaret Hodge, the chair, pointing out there was nothing worse than ” a person paid by the taxpayer avoiding tax.”

Patel’s complacency was also shattered later when HM Revenue and Customs chief, Lin Homer, revealed the paucity of checks on these people who have personal service companies. She disclosed that over three years the number of checks had been 25,12 and 23 respectively. One MP  even wondered whether this should be made public because it would only encourage more tax avoidance and evasion. This is now going up to 230 – but with 3,000 non journalists at the BBC on personal service contracts alone – how much difference will this make. More grist to the case presented by Mark Serwotka, general secretary of the Public and Commercial Services Union, that the Revenue is indeed well understaffed to do its job.

More interest for Freedom of Information freaks – it emerged that the information I got through  the freedom of information request  which blew the whole story – is now to be used as a case study by Whitehall of how something can go wrong ( or at last I hope so!).

The London borough of Barnet also emerged in its true colours . Evidently it had not replied to a request from the Local Government Association to disclose how many senior staff were on personal service contracts – the number according to the redoubtable Mrs Angry @brokenbarnet is 13. But Mps appear to be on the case – they will need to be vigilant, Barnet has a habit of not co-operating with anyone who wants information.

The hearing was a success. The next stage will be to ensure there is proper action to get these wheezes stamped out, the sooner, the better. And of course end the BBC’s complacency over this issue.