Hmm odd that those texts leak now.
Who leaked them is the big question I'm asking. In theory there are only two people who had those texts. (Unless someone hacked).
With the Leveson report due this month its convenient. Most convenient.
(And stuff to do with phone hacking and Leveson is ALSO not party political.)
I was going to post last night that I had a feeling they would announce an overall all inquiry into failures of child protection as a national scandal to take control of the situation and take a lead role over all these individual investigations in the next couple of days.
Reading this this morning, I'm not so sure now. My feeling about the lack of an inquiry up to this point was that it was symptomatic of a lack of leadership and an inability to see the need given the staggering scope of institutional failures that were already laid bare before Newsnight. But Newsnight was a tipping point that would force the governments hand.
Not doing PMQ this week is the least of my concerns. I don't know that it is the end of the world as I would imagine someone else (Clegg) will be taking questions in his absence as he has done. Thus giving politicians the chance to ask questions under parliamentary privilege anyway. (Who is answering them is perhaps of less interest and importance than the questions themselves)
What I am concerned about is Cameron, being knocked sideways by this leak and puts him in a position where he is going to be more focused merely on maintaining his position rather than other pressing political issues. I'm not sure I actually blame him for that.
If this all runs as deep as some fear (and I'm certainly not a conspiracy theorist) then there is a big motive for trying to cause an leadership crisis a) because it distracts from Cameron from the issue in general b) it distracts the press from doing what is necessary c) it is going to take a strong leader to tackle many of the issues concerned and this will weaken and potentially destabilise the current government.
The way that Leveson and phone hacking, the choices of what the media choose to investigate and all these numerous failures of child protection are hugely connected. They didn't do Jimmy Savile in his lifetime and they also didn't challenge the ruling of the Waterhouse Tribunal despite the fact that senior politicians were involved. Why? Surely these are far more in the public interest than all the other celeb stories they have covered. Its very important not to loose site of this. I was always taught to look not just at what is reported in the press - but more importantly to look for what is not reported - as that is the bigger story and reveals a lot, lot more about the 'truth'.
What has happened with Savile is the best defence against the idea of more media regulation being introduced by Leveson but it also shows enormous cracks in the use of this argument by the media when they are shown up to have failed in their 'duty' and 'purpose'. This is important to both the media and to politics.
One of the things that people always say is 'follow the money'. Stories about celebrities generate £££££s. Huge under cover investigative journalism is both costly and risky and doesn't interest as many people. The biggest celeb money generators has always been the Royal Family. Diana used to sell more newspapers than any other subject. And whats happened to Kate Middleton is also very telling.
The Savile story is an interesting one though, as I rather suspect that Savile is selling a awful lot of newspapers right now as people are horrified, but I'm not sure how deeply the general public are actually interested beyond the celebrity aspect. The names being thrown about, whilst hugely shocking, won't sell newspapers in the same way as Savile... So public obsessions pay a huge part in this in a way. The stories we look at are monitored for traffic and influence editorial decisions. Clicks count.
Whilst we are all sitting here feeling damn powerless right now, I do think its helpful to really think about all of this and if people want to put pressure on to make sure this is all seen through, understanding what really motivates the press and politicians is going to be crucial.
FWIW I don't think we are powerless. I do think as a huge unorganised group we lack leadership and direction which makes it a lot, lot harder to challenge and put pressure on to get answers and change things. Again worth thinking about the criticisms/successes of other similar protest groups in the last couple of years. Hillsborough - never giving up in the face of adversity and never accepting the official line. Occupy - suffered for a complete lack of focus and set of clear objectives due to the numerous and diverse groups involved.
Patience, persistance, clear ideas of what the main objectives and issues are and staying focused on that without being distracted by all the side shows (stuff like leaking of texts to undermine the PM) and avoiding getting into too much infighting.
That was waaaaayyyy to long, but nevermind. Soundbites don't really cover it.