Squealin' Like a Pig

Trying to save his bacon.

12.52pm: Mark Reckless, a Conservative, asks if Stephenson put pressure on the Guardian's Alan Rusbridger to lay off the phone hacking story.

Stephenson says he was told there was nothing new in the story.

Q: You told the the Guardian their story was incorrect?

The Met were not engaged in a conspiracy, Stephenson says.

To answer your question; yes, the man does know how to dance.

Stephenson says he has never had a conversation with Wallis about phone hacking.

We call this plausible deniability. Who was the go-between?

12.47pm: Keith Vaz says Andy Coulson must have known that Neil Wallis worked for the Met.

Stephenson says he cannot recall meeting Coulson before David Cameron became prime minister.

We call this the Reagan defense: I don’t remember.

Q: Were you consulted about Neil Wallis's appointment?

Yes, says Stephenson. He says he now regrets the appointment.

Regret follows a political criminal bust like night follows day.

Q: Did you know that Neil Wallis's daughter worked for the Met?

Stephenson says he only found out about this at the weekend.

Gee, how many Murdoch agents are there at Scotland Yard? 10 Downing?

Q: Why did you have to have so many dinners with the News of the World? And seven or eight with Neil Wallis?

Stephenson says the commissioner has to meet the media to discuss what the Met does. But "we need to change the way we do it", he says.

Yes, they have gotten a little lax about covering.

Q: Didn't you review the phone hacking case yourself before making your case to the Guardian?

Stephenson says he relied on what he was told by his senior officers like John Yates. He wanted the Guardian to accept the assurances he had been given. The Guardian did not accept those assurances. So Stephenson suggested to the editor of the Guardian that he should speak to John Yates.

We call this passing the buck.

12.39pm: Stephenson says it was "damnedly unlucky" that Neil Wallis was connected with Champneys.

Damned unlucky. Oh, that British sense of humor.

Labour's David Winnick asks whether questions would have been asked if a junior officer had received hospitality worth £12,000.

Stephenson says questions would have been asked if there was no good reason for this, and if it had been done secretly. But Stephenson declared the hospitality he received. And he had a good reason to accept it.

12,000 of them to be exact.

Stephenson says he was recovering from a serious injury. He was in a wheelchair, and in pain.

Oh, there’s another reason.

Q: But Wallis had a business connection with Champneys. Was it appropriate to accept hospitality there? Wouldn't you expect your senior officers to know this?

No, says Stephenson.

Q: Even though one of your senior officers describes Wallis as a personal friend?

Stephenson says the MPs will have to asks John Yates (the friend McCable was referring to) about this. He thinks Yates would not have known about Wallis's link to Champneys.

Buck buck buck.

Nicola Blackwood, a Conservative, says the Information Commissioner's Office produced a report in 2006 showing that journalists were buying private information obtained illegally. Shouldn't that have alerted you to the fact that Neil Wallis might have been involved in phone hacking.

Stephenson says that report (What Price Privacy Now? - pdf) mentioned various news organisations. Wallis was not named in that.

Undoubtedly there are Murdoch agents in the Commissioner’s Office.

Stephenson becomes tongue-tied and talks and says "when I became prime minister". Then he jokes about being not ready for that office yet.

Damned unlucky that connection. Blew his chances of becoming PM.

12.23pm: Michael Ellis, a Conservative, asks Stephenson why the home secretary was not told about the Neil Wallis contract.

Stephenson says that he first heard Wallis's name mentioned in connection with the phone hacking story in January 2011. He was off work at the time, and read Wallis's name in a newspaper story about the matter.

Let’s see….January…February…March…

12.17pm: Mark Reckless is asking the questions now. He asks again about Stephenson's resignation statement. Stephenson says he made "no personal attack" on the prime minister.

Stephenson says when he became commissioner he asked for detailed briefings on various cases. But he did not ask for a detailed briefing on phone hacking.

No, he wouldn’t, would he. Not since he had Murdoch agents in his employ, too. Go-betweens are necessary in cases like this.

Mark Reckless again. What a great name.

Stephenson says a senior official in Number 10 advised that the prime minister should not be "compromised".

(That's new. The MPs seems surprised. Stephenson says John Yates can say more.)

Ah! This “senior official” is maybe the go-between?

I hope John Yates wasn’t expecting any cover from the chief.

12.13pm: Vaz is now asking about the line in Stephenson's resignation statement about David Cameron employing Andy Coulson.

Q: Were you upset at the fact that you were treated differently to the prime minister?

Stephen says: I was taking no such swipe at the prime minister ... I do agree with the prime minister when he says this was something entirely different.

Wallis was not employed to be Stephenson's personal assistant. He played a minor role. That is one of the differences.

Whoa. Sounds like another swipe to me.

Stephenson says Wallis's name was never associated with phone hacking.

We call this technical truth telling.

....but hey, do what you want....you will anyway.