The transcripts of the official inquiry into the culture, practices and ethics of the press. More…

It's a very minor grumble. The application was, as I understand it, for a direction that the newspaper core participants should answer two questions in relation to the Operation Motorman data, if I can use that compendious term. The first we question was what happened to the journalists who used Mr Whittamore's services, in terms of whether they were disciplined or any other action. The second was what steps had been taken to identify whether any information from that data is still being retained or used, and the closing words Mr Sherborne used were: "If it is still being used, this must stop."

May I say first of all we were surprised that that application was made more than five months after News International filed its very detailed evidence in relation to the Operation Motorman data. That was in the second witness statement of Pia Sarma, the editorial legal director of the Times, which was read into the record of the Inquiry without objection or response from Mr Sherborne's clients, I think five months and two days ago.

The first question, what happens to the journalist, seems to us to break down logically into two questions in fact. Firstly, what happened to them back in 2006, when the report "What price privacy now?" was published, and secondly, what might have happened to them at any later stage.

Sir, the first question or the first part that, namely what happened in 2006, proceeds, I think it's necessary to remind the Inquiry, on a false premise. The false premise is that the individual journalists in question were either identified or identifiable from "What price privacy now?". In fact, that report, when published in December 2006, simply contained a table which set out names of publications --

Keyboard shortcuts

j previous speech k next speech