No.

The issues of intrusion, you mean?

There is already a kind of Leveson law affecting. I think you're right, and as I say, the sword of Damocles for you, I guess, if I can have the impertinence of saying that, is that, you know, there are always going to be instances. But in the main ...

I meant "reduced", I'm sorry.

But the danger you have is that, you know, if there is a rash of sex attacks in Acacia Avenue, then it is vital that the people who live in the vicinity of Acacia Avenue know that those sex attacks happen and that is closing in. That is closing down ...

Yes, but, you know, part of the issue -- I remember an argument about inquests. Inquests should not be public. You know, it's very intrusive, it's very heart-rending. But the truth of the matter is: we, as citizens, need to hear how other people in our community die, what ...

No, I'm not suggesting that at all, but if they have -- their input has much more relevance -- sorry, their input had much more relevance if it happens in this country, because what was happening in newsrooms, they were being told: "Portuguese police are telling us this and that and ...

Yes. Sorry, can I just say this: there's been much condemnation of the PCC in this room but I honestly believe that if the McCanns' situation had happened in this country, you wouldn't have seen anything like that, because the PCC would have had much more influence on ...

Mm, and this is the horns of dilemma, with respect, that you're on. Because you, as a lawyer, will say to -- whether it's me or a client or whatever, you know, one-off anecdotes make poor law. I can see some awful things that have happened. You look at ...

Yes. What I think and -- oh, blimey. During the course of this Inquiry, which I've watched very carefully, as you can imagine, you've had some witnesses here from 20-odd years ago, from 15 years ago, et cetera. I believe in my time at the top of national newspapers ...

No, plainly I do understand. Thank you.

No, I understand.

No, no, I get you. I understand. I just wanted to be clear.

That's not a question about Amy, right?

Mm.

Mm.

Two things come into that, really. One, when you're at the level of the News of the World, we're generally pretty experienced in this, so we knew what we needed to be looking for. But secondly, we would, as often as possible, liaise with the police and, as ...

No.

We would take the lead from what the police were telling us.

Children, possible innocent bystanders -- well, actually, no, I do remember now. It's three years since I left newspapers, but in the main, we would take our lead from the police. The police would tell us: "We want you to pixelate the faces", or: "We don't want you to ...

We pretty much took the view if the police were inviting us along, that it was pretty much fair game.

Well, we didn't, really.

Yes.

Yes.

Mr Jay, I'm not backtracking; I'm trying to give you an honest answer. In my time over all the years I've been in newspapers, I'm pretty confident that that has probably happened. Can I recall a hard and fast example of it? No.

I'm struggling because I can't think of any celebrity arrests in recent times. So, you know, if it hasn't happened in the last ten years, I don't know -- there was one, wasn't there? There was the Kelly -- Matthew Kelly was going to be arrested, I ...

Yes.

I can't think of anything -- it's a bit like -- you had the story -- you've been talking about Mr Jefferies quite a lot. Well, I had been out of journalism a long time when that happened, but when I read that story in the papers, in all of ...

No. But I have to say, I have seen a variety of stories in my time that I thought came from that area, shall we say.

Maybe if it turned out that -- this is a completely falacial(sic) example, but let me give you the example. If the frustration that the police were having about the numbers of times they had to arrest, say, people for knife crime and then they'd be bailed to go ...

Maybe that it impinged on another area of government.

Blimey, I can't think off the top of my head, I'm afraid.

Well, it's more to do with -- you may need to disguise the source of the story. I just don't know. In principle, I wouldn't have a problem with that phrase, if that's what you're asking me.

I mean, give me an example, if you like. I just don't -- possibly. I don't know.

Yes.

The CP -- no, it wouldn't, no.

The MPA?

I would guess so, over 40 years, frankly.

I think it's a very common term and I think it's generally used where -- basically, police very often will give background briefings about things they want in the public domain that they don't want their name put to, and so accordingly it's very often called police ...

Sorry, where am I?

I've even given work experience to children of people who work at the Guardian.

Like many things, it was the way of the world.

Because -- in exactly the same way as -- I have no idea whether you have children or not. It may be that if your son is interested in the law, if you have a son, that you may think to yourself: "There's a bit of work going on at 3 ...

But you're name-checking her. She's trying to build a career and her name is constantly being put into the public domain over something the IPCC have said she has done nothing wrong whatsoever. I did nothing wrong whatsoever. John Yates did nothing wrong whatsoever. So why -- you know ...

Under tab 5, there is an email which says -- from Martin Tiplady, which says:

"It is a matter of routine that many of the Met's people have referred relatives and friends to us for employment, attachment and holiday employment. At the senior employment, I can recall Steve Howe's ...

Well, I didn't know him. It was mentioned in passing, so -- you know, I have put, in my various executive roles, many times in my life, people into part-time work. I get to know you. You say, "Incidentally, my lad is interested in journalism. Will you give him a ...

Yeah.

Sorry, where are we? I don't disagree with his evidence, though.

No.

You should ask the questions. Yes. Yes.