Even inadvertently the Government can be seen to favour Mr Murdoch

Even inadvertently the Government can be seen to favour Mr Murdoch. Last week’s decision by an independent working party looking at the “jewels in the crown” sports (those protected for terrestrial television) to loosen the protection for English home cricket test matches, can be seen to hand BSkyB yet another sport.All of which makes Tony Blair rather more valuable than the average Westminster lobbyist. As the biggest newspaper proprietor, he had most to gain by Mr Blair’s immediate rejection of privacy legislation in the aftermath of the death of Diana, Princess of Wales.For the same reason, the imminent government decision on how to protect the press, and the Press Complaints Commission, from the privacy provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights cannot be seen as driven purely by a desire to protect press freedom. are a matter for the editor of the Times and the [Times'] independent national directors and not for the Government” – which is exactly the opposite of what parliament was told in 1981.In the same way, the Government has dismissed out of hand the requests of Labour backbenchers and countless others for new ownership legislation that would reduce the scale of Mr Murdoch’s holdings in the United Kingdom.The Blair government has also come to the aid of Mr Murdoch in less direct ways. “The only question is the lengths they go to, whipping for Murdoch, to quell any Labour revolt.”The protection of the Times’ pricing policy is just one of a number of issues where the Blair government has come to the aid of the News Corp empire.In the aftermath of the HarperCollins disposal of the book by Chris Patten, former governor of Hong Kong, and Times correspondent Jonathan Mirsky’s assertion that that newspaper is soft on China, the Liberal Democrat leader, Paddy Ashdown, asked theGovernment to look at the conditions that permitted Mr Murdoch to take over the Times in 1981.

The then trade secretary, John Biffen, laid down eight conditions for a non-referral to the Monopolies and Mergers Commission and Mr Ashdown wrote to Margaret Beckett, President of the Board of Trade, to ask her to look at how these conditions were being breached over China.Ms Beckett wrote to Mr Ashdown washing her hands of the paper’s editorial independence: “Disputes between management and the editor on breaches on independence … Nevertheless, when the Bill returns to the Commons in 10 days time, the Government will rip the amendment from it “There is to be no compromise measure,” said Lord McNally. Then we find out that the Prime Minister is a lobbyist.”

But he is not surprised. It was he who sponsored the amendment to the competition Bill passing through Parliament that would end the predatory pricing tactics of Mr Murdoch’s Times newspaper.
The Government, because of its friendly relations with Mr Murdoch, opposed the amendment but was defeated by a cross-party alliance of peers by 121 votes to 93. LORD McNALLY, the Liberal Democrat peer, provided the best take yesterday on the Prime Minister’s actions on behalf of Rupert Murdoch’s business plans in Italy: “Here we are straining every sinew to make sure lobbyists in Parliament are controlled. Tracked down to a Barbados beach, Freddy Shepherd told a BBC television crew “no comment”, before thrusting a paperback in front of the camera lens Itwas a bit late for a cover up.Business Outlook, page 23.

Sir John took no questions as he made his stern-faced departure It had been different six months ago The last word then belonged to the chairman-elect. “We hope Sir John makes good use of his bus pass,”Mr Shepherd had said.Yesterday, as Sir John returned, the chairman-deposed was not in the mood to talk let alone joke. Please, please let us get on with our lives.”It was not so much a conference as a tirade. That has been forgotten in the last 10 days.{“The vilification has been terrible to watch Yes, it was self-inflicted. But why were they targeted? Why were they set-up? I have been astonished to learn that one of the people involved in this expensive scam has a criminal record The human costhas been immense. Freddy and Douglas are full of remorse and can’t apologise enough..”They have worked tirelessly over the years to bring jobs to the North- east and to build Newcastle United from a club on the brink of bankruptcy and the old Third Division to a major force in the game They are the ones who brought me to the club …

Having reluctantly done the decent thing, however, and fallen upon the boardroom sword, they left Sir John with no option but to not so much pick up the gauntlet as run with it.The millionaire property developer whose money financed Newcastle’s rise from near bankruptcy in 1992 to a place in the European Cup agreed yesterday to return as chairman of the football club until the end of May. He did so with anger in his heart:not, it transpired, for his prodigal son and the straying Shepherd, but for the very unveiling of their shortcomings in the black and white of the News of the World.”The effect on the Hall and the Shepherd families has been awful,” he said, “and the effect on Newcastle United has been sad to watch. He did so as the knight in shining armour, having accepted the challenge of restoring Newcastle United’s tarnishedreputation.His son, Douglas, and his successor as chairman, Freddy Shepherd, were not around to face the music of a suite packed to the rafters with members of the media at St James’ Park. It proved to be a false alarm for the officers of the Tyne and Wear Fire Brigade, but not a false omen for the flagship of Tyneside.