David Cameron: there was no grand deal with Rupert Murdoch over BSkyB

David Cameron today admitted some of his contacts with Rupert Murdoch's media empire were embarrassing but insisted there was no 'grand deal' between them to wave through News Corporation's takeover of BSkyB.
The Prime Minister said he might have done things differently in his dealings with the Murdochs.

But he maintained it was 'not true' there was any agreement that in return for the Murdochs' support of the Government he would help their business interests or allow the BSkyB merger to go through.


'It would be absolutely wrong for there to be any sort of deal and there wasn't he told BBC1's Andrew Marr Show.
'There was no grand deal.'
Mr Cameron offered qualified support for embattled Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt, who has been accused of misleading Parliament over his handling of News Corporation's BSkyB takeover bid.
Mr Hunt has also came under attack from a former chairman of the BBC's governing body, who described Mr Hunt's position as 'extraordinary'.
The Prime Minister said Mr Hunt was doing 'a good job' - as he continued to resist calls for a fresh parliamentary inquiry into the Culture Secretary's dealings with News Corp.


The shadow chancellor, Ed Balls, accused Cameron of ducking an inquiry into Hunt because he was afraid of the scrutiny of his own dealings with News Corporation.


The prime minister insisted breaches of the ministerial code were his responsibility, but said it would be wrong to sack Hunt because Smith's contact with the Murdoch empire had been "too close, too frequent and inappropriate".


He said he did not believe Hunt had broken the ministerial code and insisted "natural justice" should take its course so the minister could "explain his actions, [so] all the information comes out".


"He does a good job. I think he's a good culture, media and sport secretary. I think he's doing an excellent job on the Olympics and frankly I do think people deserve to have these things looked into properly."


But if new evidence emerged in the Leveson inquiry "presenting a different picture from the one we have heard", Cameron said, Hunt would go.


"If evidence comes out through this exhaustive inquiry where you're giving evidence under oath – if he did breach the ministerial code – than clearly that's a different issue and I would act," said Cameron.

"If ministers have behaved badly, broken the ministerial code, it is my responsibility either to ask the adviser on the ministerial code] Alex Allan's advice about what should happen or to take action myself and say they can't remain in the government.


"I don't duck my responsibilities for one second, and if that has happened, then I will act. But – and this is the big but – what is the best way of getting the information about what actually happened? And I don't believe there is any better process than an inquiry, led by a judge, where people give evidence under oath, and that is why, after consulting the cabinet secretary, I thought it would not be right to set up some sort of parallel investigation."


Harriet Harman, shadow culture secretary and deputy Labour leader, said there was clear evidence already that Hunt had breached the code. She told BBC1's Sunday Politics: "The ministerial code says that a secretary of state mustn't mislead parliament. He has. He said on 3 March that he had published all the exchanges between his department, the Department [for] Culture, and News Corp. And evidently he hadn't published all those exchanges because he's now offering to do them some months later.


"Also the ministerial code says your special adviser, your political appointee, must act appropriately and you must be responsible for and control your political adviser. Well, the prime minister and Jeremy Hunt have acknowledged that he didn't – that is a breach of the code, not prima facie, it's just acknowledged."


Tim Farron, the Liberal Democrat MP and party president, said Hunt had "serious questions to answer". "I think when all's said and done, the Leveson inquiry is a separate entity. I think the ministerial code is the right way and the right structure against which Mr Hunt should be judged, but I am prepared to wait and let him put his side of the story – innocent until proven guilty and all that," he said.


"And I guess we've got to remember as well that Mr Murdoch is probably lashing out and trying to bring some people down with him. And while I might not always be tempted to trust the Tories, so to speak, I trust Mr Murdoch even less. So I am prepared to let Mr Hunt have his day in court, so to speak, but he has serious questions to answer."


Balls told Sky News: "The prime minister is refusing to investigate whether the ministerial code was broken and the code is very clear. If there is an allegation and a doubt – and there is because Jeremy Hunt clearly misled parliament on information, he was clearly a party to this bid when he should have been objective – the code says the prime minister will refer this, it should go to Alex Allan, it should be investigated now.