Cameron denies ‘grand deal’ to help media baron

Reuters/London

Prime Minister David Cameron appears on the set of the Andrew Marr Show at BBC studios in London yesterday

Prime Minister David Cameron has denied favouring Rupert Murdoch’s business interests in exchange for political support from his newspaper empire, and defended a minister’s handling of an ill-fated takeover bid involving the media magnate.Cameron is on the back foot ahead of local elections across much of Britain on Thursday. After a month of bad headlines about Murdoch, the budget and the return of the economy to recession, an opinion poll registered support for his Conservative Party at its lowest since 2004. In a television interview yesterday, Cameron said there had been no deal with Murdoch to nod through News Corporation’s attempted takeover of Britain’s biggest satellite TV firm BSkyB in return for support at the 2010 election that brought him to power.“The idea of some grand bargain between me and Rupert Murdoch, that is not true,” Cameron told the BBC. “I do not do things or change my policies to suit this proprietor or that proprietor. That is not the way I work, and I will say that under oath.”An inquiry into phone-hacking by Murdoch’s newspapers, led by the judge Brian Leveson, has revealed the formerly close links between Murdoch and the government. An adviser to Jeremy Hunt, the media and culture secretary who had overseen the BSkyB bid until Murdoch withdrew it in July, resigned on Wednesday after e-mails emerged showing he had been in close contact with News Corporation about the deal.Now the opposition Labour Party is pressing Hunt to resign, saying Cameron must launch a separate inquiry into whether Hunt himself breached rules on ministerial conduct. However, Cameron said he saw no evidence that Hunt had overstepped the line of propriety and there would be no separate inquiry unless Hunt’s testimony to the Leveson inquiry revealed new facts.“As things stand I do not believe that Jeremy Hunt breached the ministerial code,” Cameron said. Asked if he was still 100% behind Hunt, Cameron said that Hunt - who is also responsible for the 2012 Olympic Games in London this summer - was doing a good job, and had not yet had the opportunity to defend himself.“I think he is a good culture, media and sports secretary. I think he is doing an excellent job on the Olympics. If someone has breached the ministerial code and behaved badly, they can’t stay in the government. But they should be able to defend themselves.”On Friday Leveson refused to bring forward the date of Hunt’s testimony, which is several weeks away. Labour finance spokesman Ed Balls, speaking to Sky News after Cameron’s interview, said that Cameron should stop trying to defend Hunt.“If the prime minister put the same energy into defending hundreds of thousands of jobs up and down the country as he is into Jeremy Hunt - one person in his cabinet - then he might not be losing trust so quickly.”

Tycoon ‘coached for days before testimony’Rupert Murdoch had to submit to days of preparation by top lawyers before testifying to the press ethics inquiry, it was claimed. Although the 81-year-old appeared impetuous in many of his retorts and barbed one-liners, he had been prepared for the inquiry by two of his company’s top legal minds, according to people familiar with the coaching. Gerson Zweifach, News Corporation’s chief legal counsel, and Joel Klein, an ex-White House lawyer and company board member held practice sessions with Murdoch. One of those familiar with the coaching said Murdoch’s preparation took “days”. Another said some rehearsals took place in London. In court, Murdoch gave the impression of having paid little attention to his coaching, even boasting he was ignoring it as he launched an attack on Paul Dacre, editor of the Daily Mail. “I’m under strict instructions by my lawyers not to say this,” he began, prompting judge Brian Leveson to respond: “I think you’ve just caused three coronaries,” referring to Murdoch’s contingent of lawyers in the court. Murdoch continued: “But I was really shocked by the statement of Dacre the other day, that his editorial policy is driven by commercial interests. I think that is about the most unethical thing I’ve read for a long time.”