06 Mar 12 | Leveson Inquiry
The former commissioner of the Metropolitan told the Leveson Inquiry today that too much closeness between the police and the media can lead to unethical behaviour, but warned against an “overreaction” to links between the two.
“Hospitality is the start of a grooming process that can lead to inappropriate or unethical behaviour,” Lord Condon said in his witness statement.
Condon said that every meeting with the press that involves hospitality should be able to pass the “blush test”, asking “Does this meeting feel right?” He added that a commissioner’s life would be “made difficult” if professional relationships crossed over into friendships. “It is not intrinsically wrong to be friendly,” Condon said, “but I knew where my comfort zone was.”
Yet Condon urged against turning the media into a “pariah”, warning Lord Justice Leveson of a “massive bureaucratic overreaction” if meetings between the press and police were restricted, or if a police officer who “was within 50 yards” of a journalist had to record it.
The Leveson Inquiry is currently in its second module, examining relations between the press and the police.
Condon, who was commissioner of the Met from 1993-2000, said at times his professional relationship with the media would “completely dominate” his life. He said there would be an “insatiable demand” for the commissioner to be communicating with the public and the media. He added later that the growth of officers blogging and using Twitter meant that the service nationwide needed to “re-calibrate” how it delivers information to the public.
He told the Inquiry he had also turned down offers of writing a newspaper column, stressing that he had spent his career “majoring on integrity, independence [and] being apolitical.”
He told the Inquiry held about eight to 12 meetings a year with editors, stressing that a commissioner should be without favourites in the press, and that he did not think he had invited anyone from the media to his home address.
Condon told Lord Justice Leveson that police discipline goes in a “cyclical” pattern of “scandal, inquiry, remedial action, relaxation, complacency, scandal.” He reiterated that the Inquiry’s challenge is to make changes that are “enduring”.
Follow Index on Censorship’s coverage of the Leveson Inquiry on Twitter – @IndexLeveson
05 Mar 12 | Leveson Inquiry
The author of a report into press-police relations has said police officers were “shocked” and “amazed” at the level of hospitality enjoyed by senior members of the Metropolitan police.
“Most of the people that I spoke to within the Met felt that people had been receiving excessive hospitality,” Elizabeth Filkin told the Leveson Inquiry this afternoon.
The former parliamentary commissioner for standards, whose report into the ethical issues arising from the relationship between the media and police was published at the start of this year, also told the Inquiry that information about senior officers’ private lives was kept out of the media by journalists who received exclusive stories “as a trade”.
Filkin had spoken to Metropolitan police staff, politicians and journalists as part of her inquiry.
She said that officers told her they would not use the Met’s internal whistleblower service because they did not trust it. “There were concerns or fears about their future if they were regarded, in their terms that they used to me, as a troublemaker,” she added.
Filkin also said that almost all police officers who spoke to her told her the force was harmed by leaks to the press and that Met staff were “loath” to tell staff they were carrying out inquiries into leaks.
Reiterating her report’s recommendations, Filkin called for contact between the police and media to be more transparent, suggesting it be recorded.
Agreeing with Filkin’s suggestions, Roger Baker, of Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) told the Inquiry that officers should keep a record of discussions with the media “so that there can be a record of it to safeguard the public”.
“There needs to be a real clarity on what is appropriate and what isn’t,” Baker added later. “If no clarity on rules, you can’t regulate.”
The HMIC published a report last December entitled Without Fear or Favour, which looked into police relations and integrity. It recommended a more consistent approach country-wide on sending out a clearer message to staff on what is acceptable in terms of hospitality, relationships and information disclosure.
The Inquiry continues tomorrow, with evidence from former Metropolitan police staff.
Follow Index on Censorship’s coverage of the Leveson Inquiry on Twitter – @IndexLeveson
05 Mar 12 | Leveson Inquiry
The former commissioner of the Metropolitan police has said a “closed” and “defensive” mindset were the reasons behind the force not investigating phone hacking further in 2009.
Sir Paul Stephenson told the Leveson Inquiry there was a “flawed assumption” that the original 2006 investigation, Operation Caryatid, which led to the jailing of former News of the World royal reporter Clive Goodman and private investigator Glenn Mulcaire, had been sufficient.
He added that the force was hookedon a “defensive” strategy that would not expand its resources without new evidence.
In July 2009, then Assistant Commissioner John Yates was asked to review the 2006 investigation, but ruled that there was no fresh material that could lead to convictions.
Asked about re-opening the investigation in 2009, Stephenson said it “was simply not a matter of priority” for him. He added: ” Do I believe that there was a deliberate attempt to back off because it was News International? No I do not, sir.”
Chiming with the evidence given last Thursday by the Met’s former Deputy Assistant Commissioner, Peter Clarke, Sir Paul agreed that priority in 2009 was investigating terrorism.
In his witness statement, Stephenson wrote that following the Met’s launch of hacking investigation Operation Weeting in January 2011, the the Chair of the Metropolitan Police Authority, Kit Malthouse, expressed a view that “we should not be devoting this level of resources to the phone hacking inquiry as a consequence of a largely political and media driven ‘level of hysteria’.”
Sir Paul was also quizzed about the controversial appointment of former News of the World deputy editor Neil Wallis as a PR consultant for the Met in 2009. In his statement Sir Paul wrote that “with the benefit of hindsight I regret that the MPS entered into a contract” with him.
He said the pair had met in 2006, and that he himself played no part in selecting Wallis’s PR firm, Chamy Media, as a consultant, noting that it was handled by the Met’s public affairs director, Dick Fedorcio.
Sir Paul added that he had no reason to doubt that Wallis was a fit and proper person to be awarded the contract.
He said was made aware in April 2011 that Wallis was a “person of interest” in Operation Weeting, and in July that he had been arrested.
Elsewhere in his testimony, Stephenson told the Inquiry that there was the potential to become “obsessed” by headlines, and having to deal with “negative commentary” was “distracting” for senior officers. He added that there were individuals on the management board who gossiped and leaked to the press, creating a “dialogue of disharmony”.
Discussing his resignation last summer amid speculation over the Met’s links with News International and his relations with Wallis, Sir Paul said he had always held the view that “if the story becomes about a leader — as opposed to what you do — that’s a bad place to be.”
“I didn’t think I had any alternative and out of a sense of duty and honour I decided to resign,” he said.
Follow Index on Censorship’s coverage of the Leveson Inquiry on Twitter – @IndexLeveson
29 Feb 12 | Leveson Inquiry
A police officer who participated in the initial investigation into News of the World phone hacking today strongly denied that the Metropolitan Police had tried to minimise the impact of the scandal during the initial investigation in 2006.
Appearing at the Leveson Inquiry today, Phillip Williams, Detective Chief Superintendent of the Metropolitan Police Service, said that the force had been determined to gain convictions in the original prosecution of investigator Glenn Mulcaire and News of the World royal correspondent Clive Goodman, who were jailed in 2007 for phone hacking. Saying he could have stopped the investigation at any point, Williams stressed he was determined that there should be publicity surrounding the case. Williams agreed when Jay posited that News International had been unhelpful and obstructive in the investigation.
Quizzed on why the Metropolitan Police had not informed all 418 of the people identified by Mulcaire as hacking targets, Williams said only those who he felt definitely had been hacked had been informed. This included Rebekah Brooks (née Wade), then editor of the Sun and later News of the World editor.
Williams said he had not called in a broad range News of the World journalists because he believed this tactic would merely lead to a string of “no-comment” interviews. When quizzed by Robert Jay QC as to why he had not pursued the person mentioned in the infamous “For Neville” email (chief reporter Neville Thurlbeck), Williams reiterated that he would not interview someone merely on the basis of a first name.
Asked if he was angered by News International’s insistence that Goodman had been a lone rogue reporter, Williams said he had been “realistic”, understanding the company’s efforts to protect its reputation.
Follow Index on Censorship’s coverage of the Leveson Inquiry on Twitter – @IndexLeveson
