JEREMY Hunt last night insisted he had done nothing wrong as he faced down calls from Labour to resign.
The Culture Secretary spoke out amid claims he had breached his quasi-judicial responsibility in determining the future of BSkyB by privately backing the Murdoch empire's £7.5 billion bid for the TV company.
He has written to Lord Justice Leveson, heading the inquiry into journalistic ethics, asking for his evidence session to be brought forward so it could take place as quickly as possible.
Mr Hunt said now was "not a time for kneejerk reactions" and that only one side of the story had been heard. He added: "Some of the evidence of reported meetings and conversations simply didn't happen. Rather than jump on a political bandwagon, we need to hear what Lord Justice Leveson thinks after he's heard the evidence."
He insisted he had followed the advice of independent regulators "to the letter" and added: "I am very confident that when I present my evidence the public will see I conducted this process with scrupulous fairness."
Yet despite his defence, Mr Hunt is today fighting for his political career as Ed Miliband will intensify the pressure on him to go. The Labour leader is expected to make the issue the focus of his attack on David Cameron this afternoon at Prime Minister's Questions.
The allegations at the heart of the affair are contained in emails submitted to the Leveson Inquiry by Frederic Michel, News Corp's director of public affairs.
In one message, Mr Michel detailed what the Secretary of State would say to the Commons the following day, noting: "Managed to get some infos on the plans for tomorrow (although absolutely illegal...@!)."
In his evidence to the inquiry, James Murdoch, the News Corp chief, said he regarded this reference as a joke, saying he expected Mr Hunt's advisers were also talking to other interested parties about the proposed BSkyB takeover.
In January last year, the Culture Secretary said he was minded to refer the BSkyB takeover to the Competition Commission but delayed doing so while he considered proposed concessions from News Corp. Later that day, Mr Michel emailed Mr Murdoch saying: "JH [Jeremy Hunt] believes we are in a good place tonight."
Another email, also dating from January last year, relayed Mr Hunt's alleged belief it would be "game over" for opponents of the BSkyB takeover once plans to sell off Sky News to a separate company were publicly announced. Mr Michel noted: "He said we would get there at the end and he shared our objectives."
In an earlier message, the PR chief referred to "Cabinet tensions" over Business Secretary Vince Cable's negative stance on the BSkyB takeover.
Referring to information provided by Rupert Harrison, aide to Chancellor George Osborne, he wrote in November 2010: "Confirmed tensions in the Coalition around Vince Cable and his current policy positions. Vince made a political decision, probably without even reading the legal advice."
In December 2010, Mr Cable was stripped of his responsibilities for regulating the media after he was caught on tape by undercover reporters claiming to have "declared war" on Rupert Murdoch's News Corp empire.
However, it emerged yesterday in his evidence that two days after the Business Secretary was stripped of his quasi-judicial role, and it was handed to Mr Hunt, Mr Murdoch claimed he had discussed the takeover of BSkyB with the Prime Minister but insisted he was not trying to influence the UK Government's decision.
The News Corp chief said he had had a "tiny, side conversation" on the subject with Mr Cameron ahead of a dinner at the Oxfordshire home of Rebekah Brooks, who was then News International's chief executive.
Last summer, the PM made clear he had no role in the takeover issue but when pressed on whether or not he had discussed it with Mr Murdoch simply said he had had "no inappropriate conversation" on the matter.
Asked if the PM still had full confidence in his Culture Secretary, a spokesman for Mr Cameron said: "Yes."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article