Duncan Hamilton: Parliament's fight with spin doctor is good for democracy

Published on Wednesday 23 June 2010 19:22

BEHIND every successful modern politician is a successful spin doctor. For David Cameron, that man is Andy Coulson, director of communications at Number 10.

Unfortunately for both men, Coulson now stands accused by former employees of having been wholly aware of the illegal phone tapping which sent one of his reporters to prison during the period when Coulson was editor of the News of the World.

Coulson has always vigorously denied the accusations that he was aware of, or sanctioned, the tapping. In fairness, he can support that position by pointing to the fact that every investigation to date, (whether by the police, the House of Commons Culture and Media Committee or the Press Complaints Commission) has failed to produce any evidence implicating him personally.

So what's changed? Essentially, the New York Times has taken the story to a new level by publishing evidence from former employees that, despite his denials, Coulson was indeed fully aware of what was going on. Others have subsequently supported that view.

Those new allegations have lobbed a hand grenade into this story. Not only has the police investigation reopened, but the House of Commons Standards & Privileges Committee (which has the power to compel witnesses to attend and give evidence) is now going to hold an inquiry. Brace yourself, because I suspect this is going to get messy.

So how to make sense of it all? For me, there are three important aspects.

First there is the immediate question of whether Andy Coulson can survive. That will depend on the police inquiry and whether the new evidence stands up. If it does, Coulson cannot remain. In a sense that is the easy bit - there is either good evidence he knew, or there is not.

More complicated is what happens if this becomes a long and drawn-out dispute over who knew what and when? Coulson will dominate the headlines. He may be forced to give evidence in public. He may become involved in a police investigation. He, in short, will become the story. His job is to communicate a positive message about the government. If he instead allows the government to be tainted by allegations of impropriety, his resignation becomes inevitable. Andy Coulson knows that, just as Damian McBride knew it and Alastair Campbell before him.

Secondly, what does this mess mean for the Prime Minister? How long can David Cameron maintain his steadfast and public support? The truth is that there comes a point that no bond of loyalty can be allowed to dominate the affairs of government.

Cameron has boxed himself into an unenviable position where he must either remove Coulson and face criticism for employing him in the first place, or back him and gamble that Coulson is telling the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

The additional complication is the Lib Dems. Are they willing to die in a ditch for Coulson? I doubt it. Remember that one of the victims of the original tapping allegations which led to convictions was Simon Hughes MP, now deputy leader of the Liberal Democrats. Hughes told the Commons on Thursday that "there is a whole sea of illegal and undesirable activity here". Does that sound like a man who is desperate to close this issue down and save his government embarrassment?

Finally, I sense in this story a wider desire from politicians to redress the balance of power. Politicians and the media have a dysfunctional relationship - they are necessarily and exceptionally close, yet at the same time deeply distrusting.

The importance of newspaper support for the Tories until 1997 and thereafter for New Labour until 2010 entrenched a sense of omnipotence amongst some in the media, most memorably expressed in the famous headline "It's The Sun Wot Won It" in 1992. Add to that mix the relentless and brutal exposure of politicians' expenses by the Daily Telegraph and there is no doubting the power balance. It was the newspapers, and not the politicians, who were seen to be acting in the public interest as day after day they exposed greed and corruption in the corridors of power.

It may be payback time. Chris Bryant MP, who believes his phone was tapped, challenged the House of Commons on Thursday, saying, "It is about whether this House will be supine when its members' phones are hacked or whether it will take action when the democratic rights of MPs to do their job without illegal hindrance or interception has been traduced."

Politicians are enjoying being on the right side of the story for once. This scandal is about newspapers acting illegally and trampling on the rights of citizens. If an overmighty pro-Tory press can be slapped down and the government damaged, for most opposition MPs that is a good day at work.

There is a bigger picture. Democracy requires both vigorous investigative journalism and legal bounds, enforced in the courts, beyond which investigation cannot go. Both are emphatically in the public interest. The tension between them is what keeps politicians honest and media outlets from having unfettered power in the gathering and dissemination of information. The day to worry is not when newspapers and politicians are having a go at each other, but the day they aren't.