Across the Line

When interviewing a public figure, anything said "off the record" should be dealt with the utmost care by the journalist. Whatever follows can inform future articles, give another better context or corrrect false impressions. What is clear at the time is there is a contract of understanding between the politician and the writer.

Not so at the Daily Telegraph who sent undercover reporters to entrap various Lib-Dem ministers to complain about their end of the Coalition deal. Vince Cable disclosed most and rather rashly, to what he thought were young mums from his constituency. Even so he asked them not to repeat his words "outside."

Revealing his zeal to declare a "war on Murdoch" necessitated removing media regulation from his portfolio and would in any other case have deservedly earned a thorough sacking.

However it was not the Telegraph who broke the story but Robert Peston of the Beeb who had been gifted the scoop by someone at the paper who thought the corporate media group was determining editorial decisions. It is easy to see how that impression was made. It looks more like the Torygraph did not lead with this explosive quote about BSkyB takeover because it did not suit their wider interests for Vince to hand the decision to a more lassez faire Tory like Jeremy Hunt.

Perhaps the paper will learn its lesson about undercover reporting. It is totally proportionate when exposing criminal behaviour or corruption. But if it amounts to bugging in person to embarrass then it is shabby, disreputable and threatens future frank disclosure which until now made the worlds of politics and journalism go round.

Also when you deceive you can't manage what information comes out and it may not, like this case, be in your own interests.

Anyhow, without lifting a finger, Murdoch, as ever, is the winner.

You Know that I Know that You Know

It fell to Home Office Minister, Julia Goldsworthy (left) to do the press on the Government's Equality Bill. You would have thought under a female Home Secretary in Theresa May, it was a good opportunity for the Coalition Government to show their committment to equal pay in the workplace.

Unfortunately, the resultant media release was a new low in transparent nonsense from a Lib-Dem Minister where she appeared to convince herself of the entire opposite of her lifelong views. The policy measure actually belonged to Labour. It was a power in the old Equality Bill which forced companies to publish their emloyees pay rates if it had been shown they had perpetuated gaps in salary between the sexes.

During the Bill's passage Ms Goldsworthy lobbied Labour to expose those negligent companies, arguing, quite rightly, a "voluntary audit is hardly worth the paper it is printed on." Now in Government and following intense lobbying from City businesses, Julia has decided to not commence section 78 of the Act although it had already received Royal Assent.

She said in a rather supine press release it was now "arrogant" to think "Government knows best" and it was "absolutely the right time to make voluntary pay reporting work." In defence she claimed, contrary to all evidence, "we live in a differnt world from two years ago." Yes, a fantasy world in your case. She knew before what a farce such a voluntary scheme is and how business will flick two fingers at such futile gestures to equality.

It actually is a different world in the public sector. The vertitable Eric Pickles, SoS for Local Government, is forcing all Councils to reveal senior officers pay, setting a limit, tied for arbitrary reasons, to the PM's salary. Pickles lambasted CEOs for their pay rates describing it as a "football transfer market."

Not only does this policy expose the Tories traditional hypocrisy over public and private earning, it will only encourage the best public administrators to join the private sector where their higher earnings can remain a secret.