Culture, Media and Sport CommitteeWritten evidence submitted by Colin Myler

Thank you for your letter of 16 November 2011. You have asked me to answer a number of questions following up on the evidence provided to the Committee by James Murdoch on 10 November 2011. I will address each of your questions in turn below.

1a. Were you involved in any discussions about increasing the Taylor settlement above £50,000 before James Murdoch was informed? If so, with whom?

I was sent the briefing note by Tom Crone on 24 May 2008. In addition, he may have briefed me, whether in person or on the telephone, about the general background to Mr Taylor’s claim and the status of the settlement. It is unlikely that he would have spoken to me in advance about increasing the amount to be offered to Mr Taylor in settlement of his claim. This was not a matter in relation to which I had any direct responsibility. Mr Crone was the Newspaper’s Legal Manager and it was his role to manage cases and to seek advice from external lawyers and counsel where necessary on general strategy and quantum. Mr Crone or the Managing Editor did keep me abreast of the status of particular cases, if it became necessary to make me aware of developments that had arisen. The disclosure of the “for Neville” email is such an example.

1b. Whose decision was it to increase the settlement offer to £150,000?

I do not know who made that decision.

1c. On whose authority was the settlement offer increased to £150,000?

I do not know who gave authority to increase the settlement offer to £150,000. The briefing note which Mr Crone sent to me on 24 May 2008, states that Mr Crone “authorised our solicitors, Farrers, to make a formal offer to Taylor of £150k plus costs”.

2a. As Editor of the News of the World what knowledge did you have of the commissioning of private investigators and News of the World journalists to conduct surveillance on members of the Committee or lawyers involved in phone-hacking cases?

I was not aware that any surveillance had been conducted upon members of the Committee or upon lawyers involved in phone hacking cases. Nor was I aware of any instructions having been given for such surveillance.

3. James Murdoch said that he thought your evidence and that of Tom Crone to the Committee was misleading and he refuted it [Q1508]. Would you like to change anything or add anything to the evidence that you have already given to the Committee?

Mr Murdoch told the Committee that the evidence which Mr Crone and I gave to the Committee in 2011, regarding his state of knowledge, was inconsistent and not right. My evidence to the Committee has been accurate, consistent and truthful. I stand by my account of the meeting with Mr Murdoch on 10 June 2008. I have been clear and consistent throughout my evidence to the Committee about the significance of the “for Neville” email. I made clear to the Committee in my opening statement on 21 July 2009 that by that time it was obvious that Mr Goodman was not a single “rogue reporter” because the significance of the “for Neville” email and the implications of it were recognised. The fact that I emphasised the significance of the email in my opening statement demonstrated the importance I placed upon it.

28 November 2011