Thank you.

No, thank you.

Yes.

Yes.

That's my understanding -- I didn't know that at the time. From looking at the emails afterwards, that's my understanding of it, yes.

No. And actually the Permanent Secretary who brought me that statement, when I said I want "believe" removed, he agreed that that was the right thing to do.

I think the emails that I got from the emails, which I've put in one of those bundles, shows that it came from the Cabinet Secretary's office.

Yes.

It was a suggestion that the first line was changed to "While I believed it was my role to keep News Corporation informed", I objected to the word "believed" because it had been self-evident and the department had known that that's what my role had been, so I didn ...

That's right, yes.

Well, I think I was -- I thought by this stage that the perception had been created that something untoward had gone on and therefore, I mean, that was sort of why I'd offered my resignation the evening beforehand and, "Everyone here thinks you need to go", I suppose was ...

Yes. I didn't have anybody sort of sit me down and say anything specific like that, no.

We did discuss how we'd enjoyed working with each other and how it was going to be tough and it wasn't just a one-line conversation, no.

To the best of my recollection, "Everyone here thinks you need to go", is what he said, yes.

Yes, that's right.

I think I was aware it may have been one meeting or others, but Mr Hunt was certainly having meeting that I wasn't present at.

Yes. That was the reflection of the conversation between myself, the other special advisors and Mr Hunt, but that wasn't a relaxed sort of manner.

No, not at all. It was very pressured and one of the most stressful days that I'd certainly had to deal with.

45 minutes maybe.

Yes. It was sort of lots of discussions between especially when, as I say, later on I had a drink with him and the other special advisers to say that it was me doing my job and not to worry.

Yes. I suppose at that stage I didn't realise I would be appearing before the Inquiry.

Yes. I mean essentially along the lines that I've said in the statement, that they were a one-sided reflection and in many cases exaggerated and that he, as in Mr Hunt, when he came before this Inquiry would be able to give a defence of them.

I can't remember verbatim but it was something along the lines of, "It won't come to that", but I couldn't say that that was exactly the words that he used.

Yes, I'd say roughly about that, yeah.

Yes, it was whenever the Inquiry put the KRM 18 and the schedule online, which I've put in my statement was at about 4.30, but that may be slightly wrong. I thought it was after the evidence had finished they went up online.

Yes.

On the TV, actually. I think it was broadcast live.

Yes. He could certainly have taken advice from -- I mean as it happens, the advice that he wanted most was from Ofcom and the OFT.

I do, and I think because he was the individual taking the decision, I think that as well as the convenience factor it was also important for him to be seen to be only having some of those meetings with them, yes.

If they'd taken place with a civil servant, I don't think so, because I think the civil servants were in some cases sending similar stuff, like the statements and things like that, so I didn't think there was any difference between myself and the officials. I think ...

I think, in hindsight, the tone of the language that I used was not appropriate but I think in terms of the content of what I said to Mr Michel it was all -- had either been expressed to Mr Murdoch through meetings, letters or was known to Mr Michel from ...

It got quite annoying to me, yes.

Well, it may well have been if he'd been constantly badgered to the extent that I was, that might have got to him.

Not material that I was necessarily -- because I can't think -- the material that I received were lengthy correspondence between Ofcom, the OFT and News Corporation. I don't think that would -- I mean that was just far too detailed, and Mr Hunt had outsourced that work, if you like ...

Yes.

Yes, I suppose so, but for him to send the statements that News International were making is not a private matter as such.

Yes, certainly. If this was a conversation with me, it's quite possible that I asked him to let me know what steps News International was taking in response to the phone hacking situation, mainly because the department is obviously responsible for the media sector, so that would be interesting ...

Generally? Yes, yes, he would discuss with me if he'd been in meetings in Number 10 or I did quite often go to meetings in Number 10 with him.

On this particular issue?

I wouldn't have been aware, any further than whatever the press reportings on the Cabinet divisions were. I've never attended Cabinet or spoken to any other Cabinet Minister about it so that was either self-evident from press coverage or something Mr Michel was just putting down as fairly ...

-- I don't remember imparting it, mainly because I don't quite know that I knew it, which would make it quite strange for me to be able to impart it.

Well --

Yes, I would say so, yes.

I don't know that I did know about it, but he may well have shared it, yes, but I don't remember at this stage.

I don't know who else -- I mean lots of other people would presumably have known only far more than I would have done by this stage because -- but I don't know who --

Possible.

I would agree that that is a possible inference, yes.

Yes, I may well have done but I can't remember whether I did, but I think most of the discussions were -- most of those conversations were being dealt with by Number 10 but I don't know --

I'm not sure that I would necessarily be the only source of that information. I can't remember, at that stage, whether I knew that that was the case. I may well have done.

Yes.