Skip to main content

Andy Coulson: Smoke and Mirrors

It is illegal to tap phones in the UK.

Even when matters of urgent state security are involved, the authorisation to tap phones can only come from the Home Secretary - and even that under strictly limited circumstances.

So today's allegations from the Guardian that News International has sanctioned widespread illegal phone taps against a large number of individuals, including cabinet ministers, are truly shocking. These appear to be simple fishing expeditions with no public interest defence possible.

This is straightforwardly criminal activity.

The Conservatives have found themselves in a certain amount of trouble on this: Andy Coulson, the Tory Director of Communications, was the editor of the News of the World before he was forced to resign over some specific allegations of phone taps against members of the Royal Household.

David Cameron has said that he is "very relaxed" about the issue. The point being that the out of court settlements that News International were forced to make took place after Andy Coulson had already left the editorship.

The problem is not whether or not Mr. Coulson knew about the settlement- the point is whether or not he knew about the phone hacking. The fact is that his denial of knowledge of the settlement is a classic example of misdirecting the media. There is considerable evidence that Mr. Coulson did in fact know that phone hacking was going on- and his statement is a "non-denial, denial".

Under those circumstances David Cameron needs to be a whole lot less relaxed. The fact is that Andy Coulson may yet face criminal charges. Certainly this scandal is considerably more serious than the ridiculous expenses farrago.

Comments

Newmania said…
Yes the odd thing is that this is old old news .
I don`t suppose anyone cares if Coulson has to go although it does seems a bit vindictive .He has done nothing wrong for the Conservative Party and in fact this has nothing to do with the Conservative Party (Unlike Mc Bride et al)

It approaches the 'so what' catharsis for me
Eben Marks said…
If it is considerably more serious than the expenses scandal, then it is almost immeasurably more serious than the Redrag/McBride scandal (which is not to say that wasn't repugnant). Iain Dale seems to think otherwise:

"The second weakness in the Guardian's case against Coulson - and indeed for those Labour MPs who are apparently likening him to Damian McBride - is that none of this has happened during his employment by the Conservative Party."

No, Andy Coulson is not like Damian McBride, he is far worse. It doesn't matter that this happened before Coulson's employment by the party. That the Conservatives have someone on the payroll who potentially* oversaw this behaviour shows says little good about their sense of decency.

*Either he knew, in which case he's liable to face criminal charges, or he didn't know, in which case he's just a wildly incompetent manager who allowed a culture of illegality to fester at his newspaper.

Popular posts from this blog

Post Truth and Justice

The past decade has seen the rise of so-called "post truth" politics.  Instead of mere misrepresentation of facts to serve an argument, political figures began to put forward arguments which denied easily provable facts, and then blustered and browbeat those who pointed out the lie.  The political class was able to get away with "post truth" positions because the infrastructure that reported their activity has been suborned directly into the process. In short, the media abandoned long-cherished traditions of objectivity and began a slow slide into undeclared bias and partisanship.  The "fourth estate" was always a key piece of how democratic societies worked, since the press, and later the broadcast media could shape opinion by the way they reported on the political process. As a result there has never been a golden age of objective media, but nevertheless individual reporters acquired better or worse reputations for the quality of their reporting and

We need to talk about UK corruption

After a long hiatus, mostly to do with indolence and partly to do with the general election campaign, I feel compelled to take up the metaphorical pen and make a few comments on where I see the situation of the UK in the aftermath of the "Brexit election". OK, so we lost.  We can blame many reasons, though fundamentally the Conservatives refused to make the mistakes of 2017 and Labour and especially the Liberal Democrats made every mistake that could be made.  Indeed the biggest mistake of all was allowing Johnson to hold the election at all, when another six months would probably have eaten the Conservative Party alive.  It was Jo Swinson's first, but perhaps most critical, mistake to make, and from it came all the others.  The flow of defectors and money persuaded the Liberal Democrat bunker that an election could only be better for the Lib Dems, and as far as votes were concerned, the party did indeed increase its vote by 1.3 million.   BUT, and it really is the bi

Media misdirection

In the small print of the UK budget we find that the Chancellor of the Exchequer (the British Finance Minister) has allocated a further 15 billion Pounds to the funding for the UK track and trace system. This means that the cost of the UK´s track and trace system is now 37 billion Pounds.  That is approximately €43 billion or US$51 billion, which is to say that it is amount of money greater than the national GDP of over 110 countries, or if you prefer, it is roughly the same number as the combined GDP of the 34 smallest economies of the planet.  As at December 2020, 70% of the contracts for the track and trace system were awarded by the Conservative government without a competitive tender being made . The program is overseen by Dido Harding , who is not only a Conservative Life Peer, but the wife of a Conservative MP, John Penrose, and a contemporary of David Cameron and Boris Johnson at Oxford. Many of these untendered contracts have been given to companies that seem to have no notewo