From Guardian Live Blog:
Clarke entered government in 1985 under Margaret Thatcher and later held numerous cabinet positions, including health secretary, education secretary, home secretary and chancellor of the exchequer.
Clarke was described by the Labour MP Tom Watson last week as a "target MP" for the Sun because he is "prepared to make decisions not based on how it would be reported by tabloid newspapers".
 |
| Ken Clarke swearing in... |
 |
| Beginning his testimony... |
|
 |
| Mr Jay begins his questioning.. |
@lisaocarroll:
Clarke is looking very relaxed. Unlike other witnesses is leaning forward, arms folded for his fireside chat
@nataliepeck:
Clarke says he has had a "much reshuffled career" adding: "We will draw a veil over my various junior activities".
Clarke: I have the policy lead in government on 'no win no fee' CFAs.
Clarke: I was very attracted by Sir Rupert's proposals. I think justice in this country got too expensive for all participants.
@rosschawkins:
Clarke discussing no win no fee cases & cutting costs (other witnesses have talked about reform making it harder to sue papers)
Guardian Live Blog:
Clarke opens by stating that he is the government's policy lead on so-called "no-win, no-fee" agreements, or conditional fee agreements (CFAs), in defamation cases. He says these have become "extraordinarly profitable" having originally been a good idea.
 |
| Clarke speaking about 'opening up' family courts, and pressure from parts of the press to go further for stories. |
@nataliepeck:
Clarke: We've had an ongoing discussion about family courts and whether they should be opened up, which has gone a certain way.
Clarke: Section of media wants to open up family courts so can get stories about children of celebrities, never going to get that.
@IndexLeveson:
Clarke: distinction where media have influence on media-based policy i.e. defamation. I regard that as legitimate lobbying
Clarke: newspaper eds/proprietors can at times drive a weak government like a flock of sheep before them
Clarke: the history of politics is a love-hate relationship between journalists and politicians. That's how it should be.
@nataliepeck:
Clarke: The power of the press is now far greater than the power of Parliament.
Clarke: Everybody in politics knew then PM's wife had been having a torrid affair with a back bencher 30 years but never reported.
Clarke: The celebrity culture has one of its branches in the government and the politics of the country.
@IndexLeveson:
Clarke: politics now is a mass media-dominated activity, so is government. Not sure we've fully learned how to handle that
Clarke: many people driven away by politics because of the level of exposure
Clarke: key is what is public interest? What is there no right to conceal? How much confidentiality required for decision-making?
Clarke: does the law have a role in this? At what point does invasion of privacy justify legal intervention?
@nataliepeck:
Clarke: When does private life become matter of public concern? Every case requires collective judgment as to where draw the line.
Clarke: Whatever you come up with will be wildly controversial but my answer to the question is: yes, we do need a regulator.
Clarke: Conclusions will be criticised from one side and the other wherever you put the line, but people will have job moving it.
@IndexLeveson:
Now discussing the Information Commissioner's Office
Clarke says ICO reports caused sense of exasperation because ICO could not do anything about them
@nataliepeck:
Clarke: The legislative powers the IC has at the moment are very much confined in ability to take on responsibility to the press.
Clarke: I think whoever drafted the legislation was instructed to put in just about every possible constraint in relation to press.
Clarke: I was not attracted by the enhanced public interest defence, I'm not very keen on public interest defences at all.
Clarke: There is a public interest defence in the sense that you don't get prosecuted by CPS if they see no public interest.
@JoshHalliday:
Justice secretary Ken Clarke says he is "not keen" on public interest defence for data protection breaches
Ministers should engage with journalists to persuade and explain what they are doing, Clarke says.
He adds that "off the record" conversations involve a "much stronger steer" about government plans and that it has become "part of the system".
Clarke says this applies to all government departments except the chancellor, when he had a watertight operation because the information was economically sensitive.
@IndexLeveson:
Clarke: I accept the argument of journalists that they don't always stay within the law.
Guardian Live Blog:
Clarke is asked about the Bribery Act.
He says he was lobbied by media executives – including Paul Dacre, editor-in-chief of the Daily Mail – in favour of a public interest exemption. He says there was no time to crowbar in such an exemption, but adds that he is generally opposed to public interest defences for journalists.
Journalists are entitled to bribe in an extreme case if it is the only way to publish information on a major national scandal, says Clarke.
@nataliepeck:
Clarke: Would protect journalist disclosing criminal wrongdoing by MP but not sure pub int strong if about sex life of footballer.
Jay says Clarke has had a few meetings with the Mail and Paul Dacre. "We have quite a good mutual respect".
@IndexLeveson:
Clarke says he'd protect rights of journo who exposed MP tax fiddling, unsure public interest strong if abt sex life of footballer
@rosschawkins;
Clarke: there are some journalists I won't go and have lunch with, some I will
@nataliepeck:
Clarke: Think Mr Lebedev was rather interested to discover I'd previously been a director of the newspapers he now owned.
Clarke: With any luck, there's a broad body of MPs who believe extremely strongly in the freedom of the press + proper regulation.
@IndexLeveson:
Clarke: MPs who want to swoop in and take revenge on press are outnumbered by those terrified of upsetting newspapers
 |
| Explaining the way New Labour went too far with control of the press.... |
@nataliepeck:
Clarke: Good journalist won't let you off lightly if you’ve made a mistake, idea of currying favour with press is waste of time.
@rosschawkins:
Clarke: I don't give some journos stories before others myself but it is done
@nataliepeck:
Clarke: I know one journalist who was barred from Treasury and told she would not be let in again because of stories she'd written.
Clarke: Started after 1997 when Labour came up and thought we’d all been terrible amateurs and introduced people with these skills.
Clarke: In the last 15-20 years there has been an obsession with newspapers which was not there before.
@IndexLeveson:
Clarke: in the end it's for politicians to decide how far they'll let a powerful group influence policy
@nataliepeck:
Clarke: When taken to excess, terror of tabloids and subservience to media doesn’t give any success to the politician who does it.
 |
| Paraphrased: - Gordon Brown was totally obsessed by whether the Sun was going to back him, - should have been running the country... |
@IndexLeveson:
Clarke: the politics of the last 15 years has been dominated by competition for support of the Sun newspaper.
Clarke: I don't think Sun ever had significant effect on any election in my lifetime, obviously thought by some to be important
Clarke: I share more jaundiced view that Murdoch/Sun good at changing sides when obvious the horse they’re riding about to collapse
@nataliepeck:
Clarke: Don't think the Sun has ever had any great significant effect on the outcome of any election in my lifetime.
Clarke: Obviously it was thought by some to be terribly important and desperate lengths were gone to to fight over its support.
Clarke: Murdoch and the Sun very good at changing sides when it's obvious the horse they're riding is about to collapse.
@rosschawkins:
Clarke says criminal justice legislation driven by popular press, not prevailing public view that sentences shd be nastier
Clarke: I find your idea very attractive.
@rosschawkins:
Clarke says even a low cost complaints adjudicator could face thousands of thousands people seeking remedies
Clarke: public act with ferocious grief anger to things that are just now expressed in a way they like by papers
 |
| Vince Cable swearing in... |
 |
| Preparing to answer questions. |
 |
| Mr Jay begins his questioning of Vince Cable.. |
@nataliepeck:
Cable says as a city councillor he was conscious about what quasi-judicial responsibilities meant.
Cable: You have your views but you set this aside when you have to make decisions, and you judge on the facts and evidence.
Cable: Most mergers + takeovers dealt with by Competition Commission and do not involve political process (unless public interest).
Cable: News Corp lawyers took view high threshold had to be met, but I was advised a low threshold was necessary.
Cable: "I wasn't involved in that stage of the process" [when Jay refers to UILs on referral of bid to Competition Commission].
Cable: Most people in public life have views. If a politician, those opinions have been on the record, have to set those aside.
@IndexLeveson:
Cable: important to note that in this process there are legal checks & balances built in at every stage
@nataliepeck:
Cable: Actions subject to advice from officials + departmental lawyers, legal action could be taken if decision was made with bias.
Cable first aware of News Corp's bid for remaining BSkyB shares on 15 June 2010, when it was officially announced.
Cable: Had been notified by James Murdoch in November 2010 of the intention to proceed but took view no urgency about process.
@rosschawkins:
Cable : actively sought the view of Lib Dem colleagues on BSkyB decision
@nataliepeck:
Cable: Had no background in media policy so sought views of colleagues who had acted as spokespersons in the area.
Cable: Asked Lord Oakeshott to assemble of group of people to give me general advice on economic and business policy.
Cable: Did not discuss BSkyB with this advisory group, it wasn't appropriate. Didn't speak to Chris Huhne or Simon Hughes either.
Cable: I saw issues of policy as quite separate from the quasi-judicial decision.
Cable: Aware James Murdoch wanted to meet with me, also lobby groups.
Cable had representations from TUC, BBC, Enders, GMG, TMG, Slaughter & May group, BT, News Corp and Capital Research Management.
Cable replied to submissions in writing, explained power to intervene restrained by law and would be referred to ECMR.
Cable: Intervention seemed unlikely due to News Corp's control over BSkyB but views evolved.
Cable: Main arguments - increased scope for Sky News + NI to reflected same news agenda and News Corp increased market share.
[Jay setting up BSkyB process in detail, will be relevant tomorrow when Jeremy Hunt gives his evidence.
#Leveson]
@rosschawkins:
Cable: had News Corp deal gone through new owners could have replaced management and influenced choice of editors
@nataliepeck:
Counsel advised News Corp unlikely to challenge SoS decision to intervene, real possibility party would challenege decision not to.
Cable: BSkyB was an independent news generator, a change in ownership and editorial policy could have quite wide ramifications.
@IndexLeveson:
Cable says problems for plurality were 1) reduced number of outlets and 2) 100% ownership could make it possible for new owners >> >> to replace management and influence choice of editors
@nataliepeck:
Cable issued intervention notice on 4 November. Says transparency key element of the process.
Cable ws: As a politician I believe the Murdoch's political influence exercised through newspapers become disproportionate.
Cable says his views on News Corp were "actually quite nuanced".
Jay refers to a note of Cable's conversation with James Murdoch on 15 June 2010.
Cable: JM conversation was very carefully thought through in advance and there was no off-the-cuff opinion on the merger.
@rosschawkins:
Cable: spoke to James Murdoch on phone, declined invite to News Int drinks reception, declined Fred Michel offer of meeting
@nataliepeck:
Cable: Turned down NI drinks reception night after JM conversation, didn't seem appropriate.
Cable: Name Fred Michel didn’t register on my radar but I was aware that there was a request to have a meeting.
Cable: Had a meeting with (Times ed) James Harding, talked about wider political issues. Described formal position.
@dansabbagh:
Vince says he met Times editor on Dec 9 11 in his office. Bid came up, Harding commented on News C's "considerable contribution to economy"
@nataliepeck:
[James Harding/Cable meeting 9 December 2010, JH said he was not representing News Corp.
Cable: Became aware J Murdoch and Michel arranged meeting with Lord Oakeshott, and so asked BAG to be disbanded to avoid bias.
Cable: Not aware of any attempt by Jeremy Hunt to speak to me about bid.
Jay asks about SpAds. Giles Wilkes (Cable advisor) didn't have any responsibilities in relation to the bid.
