I SPEND a good deal of my time listening to the proceedings of the Leveson Inquiry.
Before it began I used to listen to Parliamentary select committee hearings.
Perhaps I should come up for air more often than I do, but I would like to share with you a dilemma I face.
All the personalities called before Leveson had to swear by almighty God to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. In the evidence, the contradictions point to the fact that some are not telling the truth When, as a student, I studied Government I was told that if an MP accused a fellow parliamentarian of lying he would have to withdraw it.
There is the famous case of Winston Churchill having to withdraw such a charge and calling his statement a “terminological inexactitude”.
Yet after an appearance before Leveson, Labour MP Chris Bryant claimed the Culture Secretary, Jeremy Hunt, had lied to Parliament and the Speaker John Bercow allowed it.
All that I thought I understood is no more. As Karl Marx once said, in another context, all that is solid turns into air.
Will Lord Leveson in his report rule what was truthful and untruthful? He may well have the faculty I certainly lack to be able to resolve what, to me, are contradictions.
G Bulmer, Billingham.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here