Rupert Murdoch 'not a fit person' to lead News Corp - MPs

 

The MPs were "misled repeatedly", says chairman John Whittingdale

Rupert Murdoch "is not a fit person to exercise the stewardship of a major international company", MPs have said.

The culture committee questioned journalists and bosses at the now-closed News of the World, as well as police and lawyers for hacking victims.

Its report has concluded that Mr Murdoch exhibited "wilful blindness" to what was going on in News Corporation.

But the committee was split six to four with Tory members refusing to endorse the report and branding it "partisan".

Conservative Louise Mensch called it "a real great shame" that the report's credibility had potentially been "damaged" as a result, with the report carried by Labour and Lib Dem members backing it.

News Corp said in a statement it was "carefully reviewing" the report and would "respond shortly", adding: "The company fully acknowledges significant wrongdoing at News of the World and apologises to everyone whose privacy was invaded."

The committee itself does not have the power to impose sanctions, but it raised the possibility of a vote in the House of Commons about whether witnesses had been in contempt of Parliament - and if so, whether those witnesses should be forced to apologise in Parliament.

Start Quote

It will give ammunition to those News Corporation shareholders who would like to loosen the hold over the company of the Murdoch dynasty”

End Quote

The BBC News Channel's chief political correspondent Norman Smith said the report was much more damning than had been anticipated and directly questioned the integrity and honesty of Rupert Murdoch.

BBC business editor Robert Peston said it would push Ofcom, the media regulator, closer to the conclusion that BSkyB - 39% owned by News Corp - is not fit and proper to hold a broadcasting licence.

Reacting to the report, an Ofcom spokesman said it was "continuing to assess the evidence - including the new and emerging evidence" that may assist it in ruling on that issue.

'A blind eye'

The committee of MPs began its inquiry in July 2011 in the wake of fresh revelations about the extent of hacking at the tabloid newspaper, with reported victims including the murdered schoolgirl Milly Dowler and the families of victims of the 7/7 London bombings.

It heard evidence from Mr Murdoch and his son James, and has now concluded that the notion that a hands-on proprietor like Rupert Murdoch had "no inkling" that wrongdoing was widespread at the News of the World was "simply not credible".

It noted that the newspaper mogul had "excellent powers of recall and grasp of detail when it suited him", and added: "On the basis of the facts and evidence before the committee, we conclude that, if at all relevant times Rupert Murdoch did not take steps to become fully informed about phone hacking, he turned a blind eye and exhibited wilful blindness to what was going on in his companies and publications."

Tory MPs objected specifically to the line branding Mr Murdoch "not fit", with one, Philip Davies, telling a press conference the committee had seen "absolutely no evidence" to endorse such a "completely ludicrous" conclusion.

But Labour MP Tom Watson said "more than any individual alive", Mr Murdoch was to blame for phone hacking, and it was right to "raise the bar" of the report and make that clear.

The committee also criticised three former News International executives - one-time executive chairman Les Hinton, former News of the World editor Colin Myler and former legal manager Tom Crone - accusing them of giving misleading evidence.

Mr Myler, who is now editor of the New York Daily News, said he had "always sought to be accurate and consistent" when speaking to the committee and stood by his evidence.

Mr Hinton said the allegations against him were "unfounded, unfair and erroneous".

Mr Crone said he accepted there were "valid criticisms of my conduct in this matter", but he was "the subject of serious allegations which lack foundation".

Foam attack

News Corp as a whole was guilty of "huge failings of corporate governance" and, throughout, its instinct had been "to cover up rather than seek out wrongdoing and discipline the perpetrators", the committee said.

Phone-hacking probes

  • Leveson Inquiry - judicial probe into press standards, investigating the extent of unlawful or improper conduct at News International and other newspaper groups. It will also examine the original police probe into phone hacking
  • Operation Weeting - police investigation into alleged phone-hacking at News of the World
  • Operation Elveden - police investigation into inappropriate payments to officers
  • Operation Tuleta - police investigation into allegations of computer hacking
  • Civil action by alleged hacking victims. Thousands of potential victims identified and several, including singer Charlotte Church, already awarded damages

And it concluded: "Corporately, the News of the World and News International misled the committee about the true nature and extent of the internal investigations they professed to have carried out in relation to phone hacking; by making statements they would have known were not fully truthful; and by failing to disclose documents which would have helped expose the truth."

James Murdoch told the committee last summer that he did not see an email which suggested that hacking was more widespread at the paper than previously acknowledged - a claim disputed by Mr Myler and Mr Crone in their evidence.

On that matter, the report concluded that James Murdoch was "consistent" in relation to the so-called "For Neville" email, but he had demonstrated "wilful ignorance" about what had been going on, which "clearly raises questions of competence" on his part.

James Murdoch has insisted he did not know about any wrongdoing at the News of the World, but took "his share" of responsibility for not uncovering it earlier.

He gave evidence alongside his father Rupert, who at one point during the hearing was attacked by a man who rushed forward from the public gallery and threw a paper plate of foam at him.

James and Rupert Murdoch James and Rupert Murdoch appeared before the media committee last July

The committee also said former News of the World editor Rebekah Brooks must "accept responsibility" for presiding over a culture at the News of the World that led to journalists impersonating members of Milly Dowler's family and hacking the teenager's phone.

And it criticised Director of Public Prosecutions Keir Starmer and former Acting Deputy Commissioner at the Metropolitan Police John Yates for failing to ensure hacking claims were properly investigated.

After initially claiming malpractice was limited to one "rogue" reporter at the News of the World, News International has now settled dozens of civil cases admitting liability for hacking between 2001 and 2006.

More than 6,000 possible victims have been identified and the police have so far made a number of arrests in connection with an investigation reopened in January 2011 - although no charges have yet been brought.

Asked whether David Cameron regarded Rupert Murdoch as a fit person to run a media company, his official spokesman said: "That is a matter for the regulatory authorities, not for the government."

Labour leader Ed Miliband and Lib Dem Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg both said Ofcom must now be allowed to come to its own conclusion.

The hacking revelations led to the closure of the News of the World and the government's decision to set up a judicial inquiry into press standards headed by Lord Leveson.

Appearing before the Leveson Inquiry last week, Rupert Murdoch said there had been a "cover-up" which "shielded" senior figures at the paper and its parent company - including himself and his son James - from knowledge of wrongdoing taking place.

 

Comments

This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
 
  • rate this
    +155

    Comment number 167.

    Slight whiff of hypocrisy here. Are all those MPs 'fit' to be MPs? Have we forgotten the Westminster expenses scandal? My reading is that both politicians and the media exist in their own worlds, completely cut off from the reality of life for most citizens. A plague on both their houses, I say.

  • rate this
    -7

    Comment number 166.

    Oh every thing must be all above board in this over moderated public web site. Britain has become the biggest open prison in the world. The people do not have any rights to complain , to enquire., to say out loud what everybody else is thinking. As bad as the murdochs may or may not be ,there is at least a basis of questioning in their reporting. The right of "ALL", except the public!

  • Comment number 165.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • rate this
    -8

    Comment number 164.

    I heard with my own ears the committee members say that "Rupert Murdoch not fit..." was not a unanimous conclusion but a partisan conclusion by the committee - sadly the BBC reporting is so biased by their own commercial interests that they are not reporting this in an impartial _truthful_ way.... The BBC should be reported to OFCOM for their shamefully biased partisan reporting!!!!!

  • rate this
    +3

    Comment number 163.

    To understand the current media circus, first you need to understand that before Rupert Murdoch came to London, all politics in the UK was perfectly truthful and honest and decent.

    Rupert corrupted the UK by introducing influence and money to London.

    The Brits hate him because he has demonstrated the myth of British democracy by buying it, and yet he is not British. if he was, he'd be a lord.

  • rate this
    +4

    Comment number 162.

    Murdoch 'not fit' boss, say MPs

    POT KETTLE BLACK !

    MPs have brought this country to its knees

    At least old Murdoch created something which pays its way, unlike the blowhards and buffoons in Westminster

    I'm no Murdoch supporter, but he's achieved far more in his life than those attention seeking idiots ever will

  • rate this
    +3

    Comment number 161.

    Unfortunately Watson dragged the enquiry down with his puerile accusations that they were on a par with the Mafia and totally ruined the creditability of the committee with his personal attacks.

  • rate this
    +12

    Comment number 160.

    How strange: MPs weren't saying Murdoch was 'not a fit person' to run News Corp when they were in his top pocket!

  • rate this
    +6

    Comment number 159.

    The public had already concluded that Labour were not interested in phonehacking at all but wanted to try to kill off Murdoch's centre/centre-right press.

  • rate this
    -3

    Comment number 158.

    88. Andrew Davies I nearly fell on the floor laughing at your comment. Harsh? Influenced by political motives? Unfair,biased,and premeditated? Against the owner of the Sun and the NOTW? Oh,my sides are hurting....

  • rate this
    +51

    Comment number 157.

    "Rupert Murdoch "is not a fit person to exercise the stewardship of a major international company", MPs have said."

    And our current MP's (and MEP's for that matter) are not fit for the stewardship of the UK.

    I remain as angry and totally dimayed as ever at the corrupt and bare-faced gall of our dispicable and vile MP's - they have been 'in bed' with the Murdochs for decades.

  • rate this
    +229

    Comment number 156.

    I wish we could drop the party political diatribes on this forum. Clearly ALL parties have allowed the Murdoch empire to wield undue influence over them in the last 30 years. This is largely a function of the focus group driven mentality of our current political class or career politicians and lawyers. We need to clear out all of this worthless bunch and start again.

  • rate this
    +6

    Comment number 155.

    "Very harsh critcism in my view of Murdoch Snr. The committee's conclusions seems to have been influenced far more by political motives rather than by taking a fair, unbiased and unpremeditated assesment."

    Nothing to do about the hacking then? willful blindness and not only Murdoch Snr it seems then!

  • rate this
    +4

    Comment number 154.

    They could have voted along party lines last July and saved us all a lot of money! What a waste!

  • Comment number 153.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 152.

    Will we now see David Cameron standing up in front of Parliament and strongly criticizing the Murdochs and setting direction against the BSkyB takeover, somehow I doubt it !! He'll spout on about "not being seen to influence....". The maxim "He that lieth down with dogs shall rise up with fleas" seems appropriate in this case.

  • rate this
    +4

    Comment number 151.

    The evidence already exhibited at the Leveson Inquiry has shown quite clearly that "hacking" has been carried out extensively by virtually every newspaper in this country.

    That MP's should investigate Murdoch, whilst wilfully ignoring the activities of the rest of the media, smacks very much of a witchhunt.

    They are all equally disreputable.

  • rate this
    +4

    Comment number 150.

    Nicky, you complain becuse the BBC do not fight all and sundry. The BBC are damned whatever they do. Labour complain of a Tory bias, while the Tories complain of a liberal bias. The BBC are mandated to present an unbiased report. James Murdoch attacks the BBC because it is a rival and NI would like to attach the BBC revenue stream for themselves. The BBC cannot return the compliment.

  • rate this
    +19

    Comment number 149.

    Such a pity that the Tory members of the committee continue to side with Murdoch, flying in the face of what every non-partisan member of the public can see for themselves. If anything the majority report understates how heinous his company had become at the very top. The Conservative party further blackens its reputation for always siding with the rich and powerful by refusing to speak truth.

  • rate this
    -4

    Comment number 148.

    The Maxwells seem to have operated on the basis of 'plausible deniability' which in the corporate world is completely unacceptable.

    In my view, they should both be barred from any position of control in any UK registered company and companies owned by them, but registered elsewhere, should be barred from operating here.

 

Page 55 of 63

 

More Politics stories

RSS

Features

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.