Mogul spawn Aidan Barclay

As the evidence mounts this week of the Prime Minister’s close connection to News International, a Slog investigation sheds light upon an exclusive club of souls owned by shadowy proprietors….and David Cameron is an integral part of it.

This morning, the Slog ran a soundly-sourced gossip piece suggesting that the Prime Minister David Cameron is looking in the direction of Will Lewis – a News International senior honcho – as the replacement for Andy Coulson, the disgraced former News of the World editor. Lewis left his Daily Telegraph post last year. He now reports to Rebekah Wade/Brooks. Rebekah Wade/Brooks entertained the Prime Minister over the Christmas break. Today the Independent revealed that she secretly smuggled into her house on that day…..none other than James Murdoch, son of Newscorp mogul Rupert Murdoch. James is a pivotal player in the Newscorp bid to take over the rest of BskyB. This morning, Culture Minister Jeremy Hunt announced he would give the Murdochs ‘further time’ to build a defence against referral of their bid to the MMC. Meanwhile, patriarch Rupert flew in to join the melee.

It sounds like the catch-up to a Dallas-style soap, doesn’t it? Now read on…

Regular Slog readers will be aware of my view that the Telegraph has turned more nasty, more underhand, and more anti-Cameron in the last year or so. In particular, it has led a concerted campaign to destroy Vince Cable by using unwarranted recordings (which clearly broke reporting rules) and giving the Business Secretary a pasting for his views on the banks….views shared by the vast majority of British voters.

What, you might wonder, has this to do with the gradual exposure of News International as a global group widely believed to have been engaged in the illegal tapping of VIP mobile phones?

Just this: Telegraph owners the Barclay Brothers are even more mysteriously will-o-the-wisp than the Newscorp family dynasty. And they are in turn widely suspected of hard-right-wing views and a desire to adopt the extremist tone of Paul Dacre’s mean-spirited Daily Mail at the Telegraph. (Dominic Lawson speaks of them in private as ‘relentlessly interfering’ in editorial comment and policy).

The evidence for this is hard to deny: following the hiring of Associated chief Murdoch McLennan, Tony Gallagher was also signed from the Mail as Daily Telegraph editor. It was he who sanctioned the publication of anti-Murdoch statements by Cable on 26th November last…comments that led to his removal from a controling influence on the Newscorp BskyB bid. The change in newsroom culture has been cemented by the arrival of a cadre of former Daily Mail executives. Others include the Sunday Telegraph editor, Ian MacGregor, and Chris Evans, the head of news at the Daily Telegraph.

But why would Mail hardmen work with Barclay brothers henchman to save Newscorp’s skin – given that in normal circumstances they are fierce rivals? Because the defence of privilege makes strange bedfellows of us all, perhaps. We might just as well ask why, when there was no place for wunderkind Will Lewis in the new Re-Mailed Telegraph set-up, a place was quickly found for him near the top at Newscorp. Except in that instance, there are clues.

Aidan Barclay – a twins son who chairs the Telegraph Group – is a great admirer of Will Lewis and his internet savvy. The two men phone and confer on a regular basis, and have stayed in touch. Now his man is in the frame for the Communications job at Number Ten.

Aidan Barclay appears to be contemptuous of elected representative power: he turned down four invitations to appear before a House of Lords communications committee investigating media ownership, saying it was not in the “commercial interests” of the Telegraph group. The Committee’s chairman, Lord Fowler, said his non-appearance was “objectionable”.

Further hard evidence of the clubbable nature of this select media-political group can be seen in the guest-list for Will Lewis’s recent 40th Birthday bash. Chief players included David Cameron, Andy Coulson, and Rebekah Wade/Brooks.

Let’s call a spade a spade: this is a small but hugely powerful oligarchy. A self-styled elite conjoined by money, power, influence, contempt for the ordinary man or woman – and above all, mutual need.

In this morning’s Daily Telegraph, for example, there was no hint of the obvious interconnection of:

*Murdoch support for the Tories before the election ** Newscorp man Andy Coulson getting the top media role in Number Ten *** the cloud of payoffs and private prosecutions following that man **** police lies about evidence relating to the editorial practices of that man ***** the key policeman Andy Hayman winding up as a crime columnist at Newscorp ****** and now another Barclay/Murdoch man in line to replace Coulson ******* who himself is known personally by all the other parties involved.

But that seven-point connection is very obviously there. And the more specific mutual need is equally easy to see:

* The Barclay brothers’ desire to see Cameron dethroned ** The hiring of Mail hunting dogs to see off the likes of Laws and Cable *** The need of the Barclays for a hard-right alliance stretching from lower-middle to upmarket **** the need for Murdoch’s Newscorp to get hold of BSkyB’s huge and invaluable cash flow.


These are people made allies by common aims: to influence the composition of the Government in power, and ensure that the key purveyors of upscale and broadcast communication remain in reactionary, monopolist hands.

Not only do Cameron and his entourage depend on the support of News International’s enormous media power, they also face the likelihood of a war on two fronts if they alienate both the Murdoch and Barclay dynasties.

This is particularly important given the venomous loathing for all members both Tory and LibDem among journalists working for the other axis of controlling media reportage – the phalanx we refer to as the Guardia Independentes.

The Slog’s view remains that while the BBC has a fluffy Left/pc bias, it is light years ahead of Sky News when it comes to overall reporting standards. And while the Telegraph has always been Right of Centre, it has become more extreme (and grubby) in its approach since the Monarchs of Sark took it over.

The bottom line is that we have a Governing Party which – along with the previous two regimes since 1979 – has been given invaluable help by a down-dumbing foreign media mogul; and a Coalition whose destruction is the avowed aim of two tax exiles inhabiting a £60million house on a remote Channel Island.

The obvious danger and hypocritical injustice of this situation is yet another reason why we need both a new political line-up in Britain – and an alternative new medium supporting a change from the sterile choice between the delusional pc Left and the ruthlessly monopolist Right.

But in the immediate term, the Cameroon clique needs to wake up: these seamy links leave it open to probably justified charges of caving in to the irresponsible rich…when they should be protecting the innocent victims of financial stupidity and criminal privacy invasion.


  1. If I follow the thread of the argument correctly Mr Cameron has close relationships with the proprietors of the major news papers, with the exception of Mr Desmond who owns the Daily Express, and whoever owns The Guardian/Observer group – probably a Russian/Communist Front Man. What’s terrible about that?
    If however there is solid evidence to show he has collaborated wit the press to cause damage or danger to our country then that’s another matter. As there is no such evidence out there then I suggest that you are over reacting to what the presence of powerful people.
    Didn’t Churchill have strong links with Harmsworth, Beaverbrook and Bracken? Was that wrong too?


  2. Coupla points:
    1.Cameron’s relationships with the media are to be expected. What really matters is whether it influences policy.
    2.I can’t see who the Barclays would want to succeed Cameron & Co if they manage to influence public opinion against him. Red Ed and Balls? OMG!
    3.On the BSkyB takeover…Vince Cable had to go because of his idiot comments. Is Hunt’s possible referral of the takeover to the Monopolies Commission just a public camouflage for a deal which will be allowed whatever?
    4.I’m still puzzled by the move of Andrew Pierce from the DT to DM, especially given his close involvement in the DT expenses scandal. It looks to me like the DT/DM are in cahoots with all the headcount exchanges!


  3. Then you don’t follow the thread.
    Cameron has close relationships almost entirely tied to Newscorp, which company is trying to buy the rest of BSkyB and be handed the right to stitch up the BBC.
    If that relationship is above board, why have clandestine meetings over Christmas with senior Newscorp personnel – what would be the point?
    Cameron has no relationship at all with the Barclays, who loathe the bloke.
    The piece is about Cameron being beholden to Murdoch, and the unelected power of media arseholes.


  4. BT
    It’s hard to escape the conclusion that Newscorp is trying to buy (1) Carte blanche on the BSkyB takeover and (2) protection from Hackgate by using both government and police contacts.
    Vince Cable’s ‘comments’ exchange was heavily edited. Those around Cable argue the comments were induced by the Torygraph undercover hacks. And why do that?
    My point is simple: things are being manipulated by rich folks who don’t pay a penny in UK tax. Irony of ironies, perhaps – but still true.


  5. Both the Prime Minister & Rebekah Wade/Brooks
    must be very naive to have had their cosy
    Xmas-break get-together, at HER home.

    When a 3rd party property meeting,
    would likely have remained under the radar.


  6. If the BBC was a bit more savvy it would not have come so far. I can sede what you are driving at. But I think because the BBC at every opportunity spouts left leaning ant government sensational nonsense, DC/government is looking else where to be able to have their views viewed


  7. Actually John, I did follow the thread. Looks like we disagree on this incipient paranoia. By the way, I don’t like Murdoch or any of his papers or Sky. But it’s a free world and I have to put up with this fact, rather like I have put up with a quasi-communistic BBC.
    The debate’s good fun though.


  8. I certainly agree with your final point and this should be of concern to all of us.
    OTOH successive govts have been influenced by outside forces for all of my life. I don’t think many people realise/understand how many new laws we get actually started life in another place and simply get brought to the UK and Anglicised, and then rammed thru Parliament. Thatchers’s money-laundering laws were a classic example. Many of NewLav’s terror laws were mash-ups of new laws in the US etc.

    On Vince Cable…the DT may have simply been trying to get a good exclusive. If undercover hacks were used for the purpose of unseating him – it worked – but it’s probably increased Rupe’s chances of taking over BSkyB.

    I can’t see how that is in the DT’s own interests – unless it’s simply a desire to undermine the coalition govt but I am left still wondering who the Barclays/DT want to see in its place.

    If Vince’s exposure had been done by one of Rupe’s own rags, I could see a plot more clearly.


  9. It’s very good fun, you’re right. My main point is 40% of uk media owned by 3 people who neither live here nor pay tax.
    That’s an empirical fact, not paranoia. But sometimes, ironic paranoia is good if it needles them….I’ve had the Wappings crawling all over the site this morning…..


  10. This is similar to TF’s point, and probably my fault for going over the top in the way I wrote it.
    I don’t think there’s a plot either: I just think the Barclays and Murdochs of this world do what comes naturally.
    Media moguls crave influence, bankers crave money, and the Underclass craves welfare. They’re all forms of dependency – and privilege. The core of the Slog’s mission is to wipe that out wherever it occurs.


  11. Does this mean that the Barclay Brothers already have a deal in place to buy The Times if that is a requirement of the Sky buyout?


  12. Who spent christmas with whom is largely irrelevant. We already knew where tory sympathies ( or interests) lay vis the BBC funding cuts. Like it or loath it the BBC is at least ours and reports news with out fear or favour. Newscorp hardly mentioned Tiannamen Square for fear of predjudicing it’s other interests in China and continues to colour the news in it’s own commercial interest. It greatly cheered me when after the Hillsborough disaster the people of Liverpool boycotted the Sun, although what reason anyone could find to spend good money on it escapes me, if only we could heave our flabby bodies to the barracades once again and say no to all things Murdoch! It has to be said that the rich and powerfull all exist in the same murky pool, and there is a tacit understanding that what ever their personal feelings for each other broadly what is good for one is good for all.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s