UK police chief defends reasons for his resignation

POLICE COMMISSIONER Paul Stephenson, who announced his resignation on Sunday, said he had made the “difficult and personally painful” decision to quit because he was a leader.

In his final public appearance as head of the 50,000-strong force before the home affairs committee in the House of Commons, he rejected “ill-informed media speculation” that he resigned because he had lost the support of prime minister David Cameron, or mayor of London Boris Johnson.

“Leadership is not about popularity, the press or spinning – it’s about making decisions that put your organisation, its mission and the people you lead first. It’s about doing things that will allow them to be proud of their leaders and this is much different than mere popularity,” he said.

Mr Johnson had wanted him to stay on, he said. The mayor had been “emotional” when the commissioner told him he intended to resign, following criticism of him for taking £12,000 worth of hospitality from a health spa as he recovered from a leg fracture.

On Sunday, Mr Stephenson defended the part-time recruitment of former News of The Worlddeputy editor Neil Wallis in 2009 because he had not had to resign from the tabloid over the hacking scandal, unlike his former boss Andy Coulson.

This statement increased pressure on Mr Cameron, who hired Mr Coulson in 2007 as his communications chief when he was in opposition, before bringing him into Downing Street in May 2010.

Mr Stephenson, denying he had implicitly criticised Mr Cameron, told MPs that Mr Coulson had “by definition” associated his name with phone-hacking after he quit as editor in 2007, while Mr Wallis had not been similarly linked to the scandal.

“I was taking no such swipe at the prime minister. I do agree with the prime minister when he says this was entirely different,” he said. “I’m just saying here and now that I made no personal attack on the prime minister.”

Meanwhile, John Yates, who has resigned as the head of Scotland Yard’s counter-terrorism branch because of the crisis, called on senior News International figures to “face up to their responsibilities”, follow his lead and resign.

Mr Yates decided in July 2009 not to reopen the phone-hacking investigation.

“If I had I known then what I know now, and the facts that News International delivered covered up, I would have made a completely different decision and none of us would be here today,” he said.

“I have expressed regrets that more wasn’t done about those potentially affected in 2005-06 and 2009. I paid a heavy price for it in announcing my intention to resign but I am accountable for what took place.

“It is News International who have failed to provide us with the evidence they should have provided in 2005-06 then. I yesterday said I was accountable and I needed to stand up and be counted. I’ve done that. I do think it’s time for others to face up to their responsibilities and do likewise.”

Mr Yates accused the Murdoch-controlled publisher of deliberately constructing its replies to the police in such a way that it made it difficult for police to get a court order forcing them to give up all internal documents.