Rebekah and Charlie Brooks leaving the High Court, 2012. Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

Rebekah Brooks' statement on trial

Former NOTW editor speaks out.

After being cleared this week of all charges related to phone hacking, Rebekah Brooks made her first public comments on the trial:

Of course the last few years have been tough for both of us and for those closest to us, but more importantly they’ve been tough for everybody on all sides that have been affected by the issues highlighted by this case. And therefore throughout the three-year police investigation and through our eight-month trial at the Old Bailey, we’ve always tried to keep our troubles in perspective. I mean, after all we have a happy and healthy daughter, we have our brave and resolute mums that have been at court most of the time and we’ve had strong and unwavering support from all our friends, our family and from our legal teams that have believed in us from the beginning.
“I am innocent of the crimes that I was charged with and I feel vindicated by the unanimous verdicts. When I was arrested, it was in the middle of a maelstrom of controversy, of politics and of comment. Some of that was fair, but much of it was not so I am grateful for the jury – very grateful for the jury for coming to their decision.
“I think I’d like to say it’s been a time of reflection for me. I’ve learnt some valuable lessons and hopefully I’m the wiser for it...
“I’m incredibly proud of the many journalists I’ve worked with throughout my career and the great campaigns that we have fought and won… All I can say to you all is that today my thoughts are with my former colleagues and their families who face future trials. I’m going to do everything I can to support them as I know how anxious the times ahead are.”

Charlie Brooks, her husband, added:

Thank you all for coming. In the last 48 hours, I’ve had to focus on being a racehorse trainer, but actually I have very little to add to what we both said over two years ago when we were charged. Everything – absolutely everything – we said two years ago has proved to be true. Rebekah has been through an unprecedented investigation of an incredibly forensic and personal nature, the likes of which we have probably never seen and I would just like to say how proud I am of Rebekah and of the dignity she has shown.”

Photo: Getty
Show Hide image

The EU’s willingness to take on Google shows just how stupid Brexit is

Outside the union the UK will be in a far weaker position to stand up for its citizens.

Google’s record €2.4bn (£2.12bn) fine for breaching European competition rules is an eye-catching example of the EU taking on the Silicon Valley giants. It is also just one part of a larger battle to get to grips with the influence of US-based web firms.

From fake news to tax, the European Commission has taken the lead in investigating and, in this instance, sanctioning, the likes of Google, Facebook, Apple and Amazon for practices it believes are either anti-competitive for European business or detrimental to the lives of its citizens.

Only in May the commission fined Facebook €110m for providing misleading information about its takeover of WhatsApp. In January, it issued a warning to Facebook over its role in spreading fake news. Last summer, it ordered Apple to pay an extra €13bn in tax it claims should have been paid in Ireland (the Irish government had offered a tax break). Now Google has been hit for favouring its own price comparison services in its search results. In other words, consumers who used Google to find the best price for a product across the internet were in fact being gently nudged towards the search engine giant's own comparison website.

As European Competition Commissioner Margrethe Vestager put it:

"Google has come up with many innovative products and services that have made a difference to our lives. That's a good thing. But Google's strategy for its comparison shopping service wasn't just about attracting customers by making its product better than those of its rivals. Instead, Google abused its market dominance as a search engine by promoting its own comparison shopping service in its search results, and demoting those of competitors.

"What Google has done is illegal under EU antitrust rules. It denied other companies the chance to compete on the merits and to innovate. And most importantly, it denied European consumers a genuine choice of services and the full benefits of innovation."

The border-busting power of these mostly US-based digital companies is increasingly defining how people across Europe and the rest of the world live their lives. It is for the most part hugely beneficial for the people who use their services, but the EU understandably wants to make sure it has some control over them.

This isn't about beating up on the tech companies. They are profit-maximising entities that have their own goals and agendas, and that's perfectly fine. But it's vital to to have a democratic entity that can represent the needs of its citizens. So far the EU has proved the only organisation with both the will and strength to do so.

The US Federal Communications Commission could also do more to provide a check on their power, but has rarely shown the determination to do so. And this is unlikely to change under Donald Trump - the US Congress recently voted to block proposed FCC rules on telecoms companies selling user data.

Other countries such as China have resisted the influence of the internet giants, but primarily by simply cutting off their access and relying on home-grown alternatives it can control better.  

And so it has fallen to the EU to fight to ensure that its citizens get the benefits of the digital revolution without handing complete control over our online lives to companies based far away.

It's a battle that the UK has never seemed especially keen on, and one it will be effectively retreat from when it leaves the EU.

Of course the UK government is likely to continue ramping up rhetoric on issues such as encryption, fake news and the dissemination of extremist views.

But after Brexit, its bargaining power will be weak, especially if the priority becomes bringing in foreign investment to counteract the impact Brexit will have on our finances. Unlike Ireland, we will not be told that offering huge tax breaks broke state aid rules. But if so much economic activity relies on their presence will our MPs and own regulatory bodies decide to stand up for the privacy rights of UK citizens?

As with trade, when it comes to dealing with large transnational challenges posed by the web, it is far better to be part of a large bloc speaking as one than a lone voice.

Companies such as Google and Facebook owe much of their success and power to their ability to easily transcend borders. It is unsurprising that the only democratic institution prepared and equipped to moderate that power is also built across borders.

After Brexit, Europe will most likely continue to defend the interests of its citizens against the worst excesses of the global web firms. But outside the EU, the UK will have very little power to resist them.

0800 7318496