Ominous signs for Yates of the Yard
David Cameron just announced a one-day extension of Parliament. It was due to rise for the summer tomorrow… now there will be one more Prime Minister’s Questions which would otherwise not have happened and, the PM promised, a full-scale prime ministerial statement on the whole affair (the Speaker has tended to let these run on for up to 90 minutes). On John Yates’ future, Mr Cameron said it was a matter for the Metropolitan Police Authority, their Standards Committee is currently meeting to discuss Mr Yates.
But he also added “there will be further meetings later today” on Mr Yates. That all sounds a little ominous for the man in charge of counter-terrorism at the Met. Boris Johnson didn’t sound very positive about Asst Commissioner Yates’ future either when he spoke this morning on Radio 4.
I also wasn’t sure that Theresa May this morning sounded like she thought Sir Paul Stephenson would be continuing in post while a successor was found. She emphasised that Tim Godwin, Sir Paul’s deputy, had stepped up to cover for him before (when Sir Paul’s leg operation and recuperation were happening). Maybe that is over-interpretation but I wouldn’t want to under-interpret in the current climate. Theresa May will make a statement at 3.30 today. Might she want clarity on John Yates before then?
More from Channel 4 News: PM ‘respects’ Met chief’s resignation
The question everyone’s asking today is what was Sir Paul was getting at with his flick of the tail statement last night saying he couldn’t let the PM know about Neil Wallis being a person of interest in Operation Weeting because it could “compromise” the PM. Not “compromise” Operation Weeting mind. That would make perfect sense as a statement… you don’t tell Downing Street about operational matters in an inquiry.
His words, carefully chosen, were meant to imply surely that the PM might have tipped off Andy Coulson or No. 10 might have accidentally led to Andy Coulson being informed that his former deputy editor and old mate was of interest to the police inquiry. But what period are they talking about? Was Andy Coulson still at No. 10 when the Met first took interest in Neil Wallis? Did Neil Wallis’s contract end in September 2010 because of some kind of interest mounting elsewhere in the Met?
Read more – Yates of the Yard: phone hacking, bin bags and regret
At the press conference, David Cameron talked about having shown amazing transparency in his dealings with News Corp and News International folk. But you could argue that the words “general discussion” in the No. 10 list on “purpose of meeting” doesn’t get you a long way. For instance, was it possible that in so many meetings over a year (more with the Murdoch team than with all other news outlets put together) the subject of BSkyB didn’t come up.
Until last week, when everyone and their dog was happy to comment on the takeover bid, we were told the matter was quasi-judicial and could not be discussed by government figures. Did Ofcom, the size of the BBC, sports rights come up? If not, what DID they talk about? And can we know about telephone calls?
The Murdochs operate on a different continent a lot of the time. Even when they are in the UK, the phone is used for contact with senior government figures like George Osborne. Should we be told about those chats? Now that would be “transparency.”
Update: Apologies – no PMQs on Wednesday but a PM’s statement + questions followed by a debate which Theresa May will open. Not sure it’s decided yet who will close.
Follow @GaryGibbonBlog on Twitter.
