Damning email condems Cameron

[Gromit]

The email was sent a month before Hunt replaced Vince Cable in reviewing News International bid for BSkyB. It reveals that Cameron already knew Hunt was in favour of the bid when he put him in charge of judging it.

Sleaze of the highest order, and now the PM is implicated.

http://www.dailymail....nth-gave-control.html

Can't help suspect that we will learn more on dodgy dealings on this one. This is bordering on corruption Italian style.

Should Cameron be ditched as Conservative leader to limit the damage to the party?

[youngmafbog]

Whoever was put in the position of judging would have an opinion. Would you still be asking the question if his belief had been the other way to match your views?

Personally I would like to see the back of Cameron. Can't stand the man.

[TheNovice]

no!! Didn't Hunt declare this and set up an independent inquiry. Perfectly right thing to do, It's also right to hear ALL the evidence before making a decision. Unlike Milliband/Jowell and co who seem to be lurching from one conclusion to another.

I see his Lordship Teflon Blair has been summoned to appear again ......could be interesting. Perhaps we can look into his record with the Murdochs as well as his handling of the WMD dossier and associated press leaks

[rojash]

"Didn't Hunt declare this and set up an independent inquiry. "

No.

[pdq1]

Hunt was the instigator of the e-mail. He tried to put the blame on his assistant who resigned. Cameron although guilty of association had to protect Hunt. He has followed the same procedure with Spelman and the sale of woods and also Michael Gove the Education minister. Loyalty should come at a price and because the e-mail is now common knowledge its Hunt who should get the chop not Cameron.

[LazyGun]

Cameron was quick enough to divest Vince Cable of his role in making a judgement call on the proposed BSkyB bid once Cable made his position clear with his own poorly judged and ego driven comments to a duo of undercover Telegraph reporters.

If you are willing to remove someone from the process whose stated position is anti Murdoch (Cable), for balance and fairness alone you should not then award the role of decision maker to someone (Hunt) whose stated position favoured the bid!

When the extent of the back channel communications between Hunt and NI became evident, he should immediately have been referred to the advisor on ministerial standards, not have the the scandal kicked down the road and fudged by using an appearance at the Leveson inquiry as the yardstick for his alleged complicity. It is already in the public domain that Hunt broke the rules by feeding commercially sensitive information to one of the interested parties in advance of a statement to the House. He has been shown to be economical with the truth about the extent and warmth of his contacts with NI.

We have a political establishment from both sides of the political divide who are contemptuous of the public and parliament, and who think nothing of lying to the House in advancement of their political agenda.There seems to be very few politicians left with any sort of genuine integrity or individuality, and the quality of our politics suffers in consequence.

We are left with the spectacle of a largely toothless inquiry and a succession of sharp suits who "cannot recall" conversations or calls that they are asked about.A defence based upon selective amnesia seems to be able to cover a multitude of sins.

This whole mess stinks of vested interests and all the comments from Cameron about Hunt following " due process" and " independent adice" are just a smokescreen to cover the fact that this govt, like Blairs before it, were in thrall to Murdoch, wanted the deal to go through and were tacitly doing their best to support the deal behind the scenes.

Cameron is all bluster and front.