Talking heads...once in a lifetime?

Inevitably the high drama of Murdoch & Son appearing before the Culture, Media & Sport Select Committee yesterday grabbed all the headlines and in between some of Murdoch senior’s Pinteresque pauses he really did say ‘I must not prejudice the cause of justice’, which was worth the two and a half hours of theatre alone.  Although his claim that Singapore is the example of democracy and freedom we should all aspire to does run it a close second.

However, it was ultimately an anti-climax, in part due to the apparent amnesia and lax management claimed by Murdoch senior and the patronising obfuscation of Murdoch junior.  But just as much it was due to the poor quality of most of the questioning, which was all too often convoluted, rambling and failed to pick up or challenge the unlikely answers offered to the committee.

Honourable exceptions were – unsurprisingly – Tom Watson MP whose pressing of Murdoch senior had James Murdoch desperately trying to intervene and Louise Mensch MP, whose closing questions finally asked direct questions about Rupert Murdoch’s own responsibility as CEO.  Which of course he denied.

Far more revealing and forensic was the Home Affairs Select Committee, that was relegated to a support act.  Which was a shame, as, in the course of three sessions with senior Metropolitan Police figures the dysfunctional nature of the Met. Police was laid bare.  Each witness contradicted each other, passed blame around and showed a remarkable lack of knowledge of their own processes.


On the appointment of Neil Wallis, the ex-News of the World Deputy Editor as a freelancer on a retainer, Dick Fedorcio, the Director of Public Affairs, was asked who recommended Wallis to him, he couldn’t remember.  But he could remember asking John Yates to perform due diligence before appointing Wallis.

John Yates, who resigned as Assistant Commissioner the day before, was next to face the Committee.  And he completely contradicted Fedorcio, while conceding that he knew Wallis professionally and socially.  Unfortunately nobody sought to ask who paid for the tickets to the football matches Yates told the Committee he went to with Wallis, which might have been interesting.

But at least they did ask how the commissioning was carried out, for a retainer that Fedorcio wanted to cover the illness of his deputy, despite having a staff of forty-five in the Public Affairs department.  He clearly didn’t think much of his own team!

Fedorcio confirmed that three quotes were sought by email, so the work was not openly offered.  Neil Wallis apparently came in with the lowest quote of £1,000 a day.  No mention of written submissions, interviews or other members of staff being involved in the process, beyond John Yates disputed involvement.

Unsurprisingly both Yates and Fedorcio have been referred to the Independent Police Complaints Commission, along with Sir Paul Stephenson, who believed there was nothing wrong with taking £12,000 of hospitality as long as it was entered into the record and seemed to struggle with the idea that he should have known that the company offering the recuperative care – Champneys – was also a client of Neil Wallis.

It is worrying that such senior figures claim never to have sought to check who else someone they were commissioning might be working for.  It seems the whole idea of ‘conflicts of interest’ just passed them by. 

Dick Fedorcio has an OBE and Sir Paul Stephenson, obviously, a knighthood.  John Yates may well have a cabinet full of awards as well and of course all three men have the right of presumption of innocence but there’s an awful smell starting to come out of New Scotland Yard...