The Staggers

The New Statesman’s rolling politics blog

Cameron fails to solve his Coulson problem

The mantra that he gave a "second chance" to his friend is hopelessly inadequate.

By George Eaton Published 08 July 2011 12:11

As an act of damage limitation, David Cameron's press conference began well. He promised a full public inquiry with a judge in charge so that there's "no question that it is totally independent". He declared that the Press Complaints Commission had "failed" and signalled an end to the system of self-regulation.On the BSkyB bid, he merely stated that the government would "follow legal processes" but skipped over the subject so fast that few had a chance to notice.

He refused to call directly for Rebekah Brooks to go but smartly said that he would have accepted her resignation, thus deterring any questions about his personal friendship with the News International chief executive. But inevitably it was Cameron's decision to hire Andy Coulson, the man he said "became a friend and is a friend", that dominated proceedings.

Throughout, he repeated the mantra that he gave Coulson a "second chance" but, regretfully, "it didn't work out." But the question that Cameron appeared unwilling to confront was why it "didn't work out". Asked how he responded when the Guardian revaled in 2009 that the News of the Worldpaid out £1m to gag the victims of phone hacking, Cameron replied that he asked new questions of Coulson but continued to accept his "assurances". It was a hopelessly inadequate response that leaves the Prime Minister as either a fool or a knave.

Cameron was equally unconvincing when asked by the Times's Roland Watson what "specific assurances" he sought before hiring Coulson in 2007 (a decision that Cameron pointedly said was "mine and mine alone"). He replied that a "basic background check" was carried out (as Paul Waugh says, basic indeed) and that since a police investigation had already taken place, no further assurances were required. He maintained that Coulson should be judged by "the work he did for the Conservative Party and for me", as if his alleged criminality was a mere detail. What Cameron desperately needs to offer is an apology for his decision to hire a man whose arrest is imminent. Today he missed the best opportunity he will have to do so.

In a transparent attempt to redistribute some of the blame, Cameron insisted that everyone - politicians, the press, the police - was "in this together". But while all sides may have questions to answer, some face far bigger questions than others. And, today, Cameron failed to answer them.

Special Offer: Get 12 issues of New Statesman magazine for just £12

Tags: Andy Coulson David Cameron

More from George Eaton

25 comments

Sat, 2011-07-09 04:21 — elrob

the idiot telegramsam
At the national level, journalism is rotten to the core, amoral, corrupt, criminal.
So the Guardian that broke this story is amoral? Criminal?? that researched and hounded it for two years; who warned Cameron on Coulson is corrupt?
So Bryant and Watson are also corrupt?
Cable who declared he was "at war with Murdoch" is corrupt and all the other simplistic mud throwing. So easy, isn't it?
So easy to fling mud. It's not just me who toadied to Murdoch, it was everyone. Like the way Cameron, friend to Coulson and Brooks, the two NotW editors, squeals "we are all in this together", Don't blame me!
-------
At the Met Police level, the majority of its senior/middle officers are amoral, corrupt, criminal.

So the detectives on the team, bringing Coulson and others to book. They are all corrupt?

No they are not.
Finally we can fling Murdoch and his vile empire to the winds.

And you're just an idiot!

Sat, 2011-07-09 04:35 — Tom (not verified)

Bad spin control on Cameron's part in this. Considering the speculation that was in this, why would a Prime Minister subject himself to all minds of potential legal problems later?

Considering the previous inquiries that have been held (David Kelly, the Iraq war), I have serious doubts that this will be any different. If Cameron were to called as a witness in this inquiry or in a trial, would he actually testify? or, would he cite national security or executive priveledge to get out of it?

Sat, 2011-07-09 11:28 — gerry (not verified)

Oh elrob - grow up!

It was my original post earlier yesterday that telegramsam was quoting, and I stand by every word.

The fake, self-serving "outrage" of Miliband, Clegg, Harman, Cable, Cameron is vile and sickening...they are - in their fawning over power, especially media and police power - ALL THE SAME, amoral, hypocritical, corrupt, spineless and they know it.

And national journalism is 100% amoral corrupt and criminal too - their dirty little secrets (pervasive bribery, intimidation, criminality, use of paid informers, police collusion, invasions of privacy, day-to-day telling of lies and half-truths, pitiless hounding and bullying, direct links to the gangster underworld) WERE known for years to every single journalist, editor and reporter, MP.

Only now are their secrets being exposed to those who didnt know them - some of the public.

Sadly, elrob, people like you who pretend that Miliband or Labour is any better/more moral than Cameron or Clegg, ARE part of the problem, not the solution.

Fri, 2011-07-08 12:30 — Olu Ojedokun (not verified)

At last the starry eyed press has began to see the PM for what he has always been, an overrated PR man....

Fri, 2011-07-08 12:37 — Freeman2

True, but look how long Blair - a dodgy actor - lasted.

Fri, 2011-07-08 12:42 — matthew fox (not verified)

How many second chances will voters give Cameron?

Fri, 2011-07-08 12:59 — hugh markey (not verified)

Spread it far and wide. Dodgy dossier! Inherited the problem from the previous administration. Gordon Brown!
One of our more incisive members, o k, it was the wife, queried whether Dr David Kelly's phone was hacked. Same goes for phones of colleagues, friends and family! And don't forget Andy Milligan.
Electronic Ere Ere

Fri, 2011-07-08 12:59 — Bill Fraser (not verified)

This dumb obsession of the Labour party and the media with Coulson will let the real culprits off the hook...

They want Coulson to be a distraction and scapegoat for the media... an its
working as already the news channels
are obsessed with Coulson to the exclusion of everything else...

Gullible fools!

Fri, 2011-07-08 13:10 — gerry (not verified)

Lets tell the truth here!

Cameron doesnt give a damn about the immorality/illegality of hacking Milly Dowler's phone, or the 7/7 victims, or the families of dead soldiers...but then neither does Miliband or Clegg.

Every single MP - with one or two honourable exceptions like Tom Watson - KNEW that hacking, illegal invasions of privacy, payments to police for confidential info was and is rife, and the norm, in the national news media.

Blair knew it, Brown knew it, Hague knew it, Clegg knew it, Cameron knew it... they only had to glance at the 2006 Information Commision's report to prove it!

All of them were prepared to ignore/bury it if they could get the support of Murdoch's papers.

Cameron bought in Coulson in 2007 exactly to get that support, and he did. The Murdoch press turned on Brown, and he was finished.

The synthetic outrage of Cameron, Miliband, Clegg, Prescott, Soames, etc is truly sickening!

Whilst it is great that the evil that is the News of the World is closing down and its staff made redundant (though I am sure they will soon pop up at the Sun on Sunday), every single national journalist, reporter and editor also knew, and knows, how rife, and the norm , hacking, illegal inavsions of privacy, and bribery of police has been and is.

The current political editor of the News of the World knows it too, and to pretend that he and his staff knew nothing about its widespread use is a bare-faced lie.

Reporters at the New Statesman who have had anything to do with the national press know this too.

Stop being mealy mouthed, George, and tell it like it is - for once!

At the national level, journalism is rotten to the core, amoral, corrupt, criminal.

At the national level, political leaders are rotten to the core, hypocritical, amoral, corrupt.

At the Met Police level, the majority of its senior/middle officers are amoral, corrupt, criminal.

This is why they do what they do, and say what they say, about this welcome exposure into the nexus of lies, bribery, criminality and illlegality that is the national media, the police and the politicians.

Tell it like it is!

Fri, 2011-07-08 13:15 — Golding (not verified)

‘A SECOND CHANCE’

‘He was an evil, vicious, cruel rascal. We got on very well, really, I suppose, all things considered’
[Flashman]

Fri, 2011-07-08 13:17 — Stu (not verified)

I can't believe this, the article on the one hand says he should put up his hands to right the wrong - and if he does this author will probably write another article and say... 'Cameron is a fool and should stand down'.

What Cameron has smartly done is to partially claim responsibility whilst also laying some blame on this so called 'check' and we all know one thing...

These background checks are rubbish... peado's can get jobs at schools, illegal immigrants can get jobs at MP houses so it is a perfect scapegoat and if anything Cameron can say... (although he probably wouldn't) that it's a legacy left behind by crappy Labour.

I say well played to Cameron.

Fri, 2011-07-08 13:49 — Neuroskeptic (not verified)

"peado's can get jobs at schools"

Yes, they can, if they haven't been caught yet.

If your background is that you've never been convicted of anything, then a background check is going to say "he's never been convicted of anything", isn't it?

How do you propose to stop "paedos" who haven't been caught yet from getting jobs at schools?

Give all prospective teachers lie detector tests? "Are you now, or have you ever been, A SEX PEST?!"

Actually hang on, given that anyone who's not been convicted of paedophilia could be a paedo anyway -

are YOU one? You've never been convicted I assume, but hey, anyone can go around with a clean criminal record these days.

Nonce.

Fri, 2011-07-08 13:51 — maxinemf

Unlike the previous Labour Government, David Cameron did enjoy warm and personal social relationships with both Rebekka W, Elisabeth M, Matthew F and James M. This level of intimacy was never enjoyed by the previous Labour Government. Needing to have the Murdoch Empire on board, Cameron went further than any previous government in cementing this relationship. Having failed to win a magority in the last election, Cameron was weakened and so more dependent on NI. Cameron's defence of Coulson is nonsensical. Given that Cameron had access to the 2006 report about press impropriety, how could he then go onto hire Coulson. It shows a fundamental lack of judgment and dismissal of the court of public opinion. That Cameron has refused to condemn AC, RW or JM indicates has shown Cameron to be weak and indecisive.

Fri, 2011-07-08 13:59 — maxinemf

Surely the next question that needs to be addressed is if the culture of hacking was widespread at the NOW then surely it was widespread too at the Sun newspaper. The Sun often engages in the same sort of celebrity exposes for which the NOW is famous. How could we know whether phones ahd been hacked by the SUN or the NOW??

Fri, 2011-07-08 14:05 — maxinemf

One should also ask Miliband to address the question of why he has appointed an ex Times man to head his Communications Unit. Also I have not heard Miliband mention the fact that any press/police inquiry or inquiries should be open ended and the terms of reference should not be dictated by the politicians(as previous enquiries have been)

Fri, 2011-07-08 14:05 — hawkwindboy (not verified)

What Cameron could have done, was to hit the News Corp hard, in the present situation they would have to take the hit. By doing this, he would have won the country’s middle ground. He could have also praised the Guardian for it is uncovering of the hacking scandal. He should have shown anger by the betrayal and lies of Coulson. Then apologised for his total lack of judgement on his appointment. By doing these things he could have walked away looking humble yet tough and back in control.

But no he turn his back and trotted out like the Murdoch poodle he is

Fri, 2011-07-08 14:13 — Lou (not verified)

Cameron played catch up too late in the story today, he said what he should have said from the off but had to wait til News Inc had hung a few patsys out, closed the 'problem' down before he could comment.

One disturbing point, Mark Stephens said last night that the closure of NotW means the company no longer exists and all documents pertaining to the NotW can now be shredded, disposed of and removed and by the time any inquiry begins there will be no evidence to be found.

Regarding Murdoch shutting the NotW, has everyone conveniently forgotten what he did before where six thousand people lost their jobs at Wapping?

Fri, 2011-07-08 14:37 — capt-price (not verified)

I'll bet Cameron is hoping for some other news worthy headline to gather pace. Probably Cheryl Cole or some other dross like that.

He'll then kick this scandal into the long grass and us idiots(the public) will accept it. That's how docile we've become.

Fri, 2011-07-08 15:10 — Stu (not verified)

Neuroskeptic,

"If your background is that you've never been convicted of anything, then a background check is going to say "he's never been convicted of anything", isn't it?"

So this background check for peado's just looks at people's criminal records? Don't be stupid... you and I would expect them to involve checking their families and friends, any past medical, psychological issues etc...

fair enough, but if they were crap at it then there lies a problem, so blame can be laid on things like tighting these checks, more regulations, procedures etc...

Fri, 2011-07-08 15:17 — elrob

apologies If six copies of my entry are posted. But it has yet to work.

Fri, 2011-07-08 15:27 — elrob

Miliband's quick decision to pull the rug on any further cosying up to Murdoch's empire may seem an obvious judgement but it was a momentous occasion, filled with danger for him and his party.

That he and the party have taken this on means they have finally overcome fear. And if not now, when?

NewLabour was terrified of Murdoch, and squeezed ever closer to blunt any attacks. One of Cameron's potentially fatal mistakes has been to play the Heir to Blair role too keenly. His closeness to the centre of that vile empire was dangerous to democracy; and the only way to extricate himself now is to send the Sky takeover bid to the authorities to decide on the "fitness to run" or not of Murdoch.

Fri, 2011-07-08 16:25 — skiptonman

You have to wonder if all this has been a stalling process so evidence could be destroyed, why did the police not act in the first place ? another example of ` do as we say , not as we do `

Fri, 2011-07-08 17:08 — telegramsam

Important truths need to be repeated - again and again until we understand: