House of Commons Home Affairs Committee

Unauthorised tapping into or hacking of mobile communications: follow up

Oral and written evidence

4 September 2012 Deputy Assistant Commissioner Sue Akers QPM

Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 4 September 2012

HC 562-i Published on 7 November 2012 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £4.00

The Home Affairs Committee

The Home Affairs Committee is appointed by the House of Commons to examine the expenditure, administration, and policy of the Home Office and its associated public bodies.

Current membership Rt Hon Keith Vaz MP (Labour, Leicester East) (Chair) Nicola Blackwood MP (Conservative, Oxford West and Abingdon) James Clappison MP (Conservative, Hertsmere) Michael Ellis MP (Conservative, Northampton North) Lorraine Fullbrook MP (Conservative, South Ribble) Dr Julian Huppert MP (Liberal Democrat, Cambridge) Steve McCabe MP (Labour, Birmingham Selly Oak) Rt Hon Alun Michael MP (Labour & Co-operative, Cardiff South and Penarth) Bridget Phillipson MP (Labour, Houghton and Sunderland South) Mark Reckless MP (Conservative, Rochester and Strood) Mr David Winnick MP (Labour, Walsall North)

Powers The Committee is one of the departmental select committees, the powers of which are set out in House of Commons Standing Orders, principally in SO No 152. These are available on the Internet via www.parliament.uk.

Publication The Reports and evidence of the Committee are published by The Stationery Office by Order of the House. All publications of the Committee (including press notices) are on the Internet at www.parliament.uk/homeaffairscom.

Committee staff The current staff of the Committee are Tom Healey (Clerk), Dr Richard Benwell (Second Clerk), Ruth Davis (Committee Specialist), Eleanor Scarnell (Committee Specialist), Andy Boyd (Senior Committee Assistant), Michelle Garratty (Committee Assistant). John Graddon (Committee Support Officer) and Alex Paterson (Select Committee Media Officer).

Contacts All correspondence should be addressed to the Clerk of the Home Affairs Committee, House of Commons, 7 Millbank, London SW1P 3JA. The telephone number for general enquiries is 020 7219 3276; the Committee’s email address is [email protected].

List of witnesses

Tuesday 4 September 2012 Page

DAC Sue Akers QPM Ev 1

cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [SO] Processed: [06-11-2012 14:43] Job: 023365 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/023365/023365_o001_db_HAC 04.09.12 Unauthorised tapping corrected.xml

Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 1

Oral evidence

Taken before the Home Affairs Committee on Tuesday 4 September 2012

Members present: Keith Vaz (Chair)

Nicola Blackwood Alun Michael Mr James Clappison Bridget Phillipson Michael Ellis Mark Reckless Lorraine Fullbrook Mr David Winnick Dr Julian Huppert ______

Examination of Witness

Witness: Sue Akers QPM, Deputy Assistant Commissioner, Metropolitan Police Service, gave evidence.

Q1 Chair: Could I call the Committee to order and hold. Likely victims need to have some other refer everyone present to the Register of Members’ additional material around them that would enable Interests where the interests of members of this hacking to take place, so would include, for instance, Committee are noted, and can I welcome, for her last a PIN number or a unique voicemail number. Also we appearance before the Select Committee, Deputy have some audio tapes, so where we have those or Assistant Commissioner Sue Akers. transcripts we include them as likely victims. Alun Michael: As these are policing issues, I perhaps As of 31 August, potential victims—people whose ought to declare, in addition to what is registered in name and phone number are in the material—are the Register of Members’ Interests, the fact that I am 3,675, of whom 1,894 have been contacted, meaning a candidate for police commissioner elections in South that unsuccessful attempts to contact on numbers are Wales in November. 1,781. Likely victims, which is the category that perhaps Members will be more interested in because Q2 Chair: Thank you. Mr Michael is noting the fact these people are likely to have been victims of that he is a candidate in the forthcoming elections in hacking, we assess to be at 1,069, of whom 658 have November for South Wales. been contacted, leaving 388 who were not contactable This is part of our regular update from the Deputy for various reasons and 23 who, for operational Assistant Commissioner, following our report last reasons, we chose not to tell. year into phone hacking. We are most grateful to you for coming here today, and we have noted the Q3 Chair: That is a higher figure than the figure you evidence that you have given to Lord Justice Leveson. gave Lord Justice Leveson, because on 23 July you If I can begin by running through some of the figures said that the number of likely victims was 702. You that you have given us in the past and some of the are giving us a figure of over 1,000 today, so it has figures that you have given to Lord Justice Leveson. grown since July. Is it because you have gone through I think you said on the last occasion, Deputy Assistant the files and you have found more names? Commissioner, that there were 4,775 potential Sue Akers: There will be an assessment taken on the victims. As of now, 2,615 have been notified. There basis of a whole range of factors and—1 are 2,160 yet to be notified. There are 702 likely victims of this, you told Lord Justice Leveson, on 23 Q4 Chair: But the figure is higher? July. Twenty-six people have been arrested, nine Sue Akers: But the figure is higher. people have been charged and therefore, according to my calculations, it will be December 2013 before all Q5 Chair: Yes, and this is because you have come the potential victims have been notified. Do you across more names? recognise those figures or do you have some new Sue Akers: This will be in the course of our figures for the Committee? investigation, as we speak to people and they get to Sue Akers: I think it would be a very useful view material, they start to identify other people that opportunity now to give you what we consider to be are in the material and lead us on to others, so it the most up-to-date figures. They are a bit of a moving grows, rather than the other way round. feast because, as we investigate and get to meet with who we think are potential victims, sometimes they Q6 Chair: As of now—because the Committee is do not turn out to be such. That is why there is a keen to know when this is all going to be concluded, fluctuation in victims. If I may start with the victims, firstly, I can say that 1 The witness later clarified: For the avoidance of doubt, the we have notified and made contact with every single evidence I gave to Lord Justice Leveson on 23 July was that “we've notified a total of 2,615, of which 702 we think are person we consider to be either potential or likely likely to have been victims”. So this should be compared victims. Potential victims we define as anybody whose with the figure of 658, not 1069. This changes the response name and phone number is in the material that we to Q4—the figure is in fact lower. cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [06-11-2012 14:43] Job: 023365 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/023365/023365_o001_db_HAC 04.09.12 Unauthorised tapping corrected.xml

Ev 2 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence

4 September 2012 Sue Akers QPM as I am sure you are—how many more are left to arrested in Operation Weeting, eight have now been be contacted? charged, which means that there are some who are Sue Akers: None. still awaiting a decision and others that it has been Chair: None? decided to take no further action against. Sue Akers: We have contacted over 2,500 people and Chair: Dr Huppert has a question on people notified. we are satisfied that we have made contact. There may be more to be followed up but, in actual notification Q13 Dr Huppert: Perhaps I misheard you, DAC terms, everybody has been notified. Akers. Did you say that there were some people it had been decided not to contact? Q7 Chair: You are telling this Committee today, as Sue Akers: Yes. of now— Sue Akers: We have completed the activity that the Q14 Dr Huppert: Why was it decided not to Committee were very worried about on the last contact them? occasion. Sue Akers: For operational reasons. Chair: We were. Sue Akers: I think I said we had contacted 170, and Q15 Dr Huppert: These are people whose phones you were adding names and phone numbers and were hacked but are presumably involved in some coming to very big numbers but— other way as well? Sue Akers: Yes. It is very difficult for me to disclose Q8 Chair: But you have contacted everyone you that here. think you need to contact and the total is what? Sue Akers: The total number of potential and likely Q16 Dr Huppert: Will you at some point be victims combined is 4,744, and of those 2,500 have notifying them? been contacted. The rest we can’t contact. Sue Akers: No.

Q9 Chair: You have now arrested 26 people to date. Q17 Nicola Blackwood: I want to follow up on the Has that gone up since yesterday? 2,500 people that are non-contactable. At what point Sue Akers: In terms of numbers of arrests, on do you come to the conclusion that individuals are Operation Weeting, which is the phone hacking, we non-contactable? What process did you go through for have arrested 25. I do not know, Chair, whether you trying to contact them? are interested in the other operations? Sue Akers: It would be where we have been unable Chair: We are very interested in the other operations: to put a name to a unique voicemail number. There Tuleta and Elveden. will be names that are so common that we can’t Sue Akers: In Elveden, which is allegations of corrupt narrow it down enough to identify an individual. payments, we have made 43 arrests, and in Tuleta, There will be a range of reasons, bearing in mind that which includes computer hacking and stolen mobile we are dealing with material that is now six years old. phones, among other things, there have been 11 arrests Lots of people don’t have the same telephone to date. numbers; people move on. It is very difficult this long after the event, but we have taken every reasonable Q10 Chair: So the total number of people arrested in step to contact people where we are able. all your operations—my mathematics is not perfect— is 75 people? Q18 Mark Reckless: Of the 4,744 on the potential Sue Akers: I make it 79. list, you have contacted 2,500 but the rest you haven’t? Q11 Chair: Yes, as I said, it wasn’t perfect—79 Sue Akers: Yes. people. Of those 79 people arrested, how many were police officers and how many were journalists? Q19 Mark Reckless: Almost by definition, don’t you Sue Akers: In the phone hacking, 12 were current or start with a mobile number? Are you saying that former journalists. In corrupt payments, 24 current because of the lapse of six years, almost half of those and former journalists and five police officers, nine people have changed their mobile number and other public officials and five people who were therefore you can’t contact them? conduits for the corrupt payments. Sue Akers: As I said before, there is a whole range of reasons why we have not been able to contact them. Q12 Chair: That is 79 people arrested but only nine Where we have, we have done so but we have to draw people have been charged. Is it a worry to you that a line somewhere and— despite the thousands of names you have gone through and the number of arrests you have made, you only Q20 Mark Reckless: If you have a mobile number have enough evidence to charge nine? for them, wouldn’t you ring up that mobile and try to Sue Akers: It is not a worry to me. We work hand in speak to them or leave a message? glove with the CPS. We still have files that await a Sue Akers: Yes, we have done that. We have done decision with the CPS. We are constantly providing everything. The number I gave you is after all those them with files and they are constantly providing us inquiries have been made, so numbers have been rung. with charging decisions. It is just that those are the first decisions that have been made and they have Q21 Mark Reckless: Might it be that some of those resulted in charges. Of the people that we have you are contacting do not want to speak to you, like cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [06-11-2012 14:43] Job: 023365 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/023365/023365_o001_db_HAC 04.09.12 Unauthorised tapping corrected.xml

Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 3

4 September 2012 Sue Akers QPM you do not want to speak to the 23 you haven’t Sue Akers: Yes. contacted? Lorraine Fullbrook: There is a fair chunk—nearly Sue Akers: No. If they did not want to speak to us we 50% more—that you have not been able to identify in would consider that they at least had been notified, so fact. I don’t understand why you haven’t. they would not be among the number. These are Sue Akers: Because practically we cannot establish people who do not hold the same number, or have who they are. common names—a whole range of reasons why. Q28 Alun Michael: Is it the case that people have Q22 Chair: I think the point Mr Reckless is making not been identified, or that in many of these cases is that when you leave a message you don’t say, “By there isn’t anyone to identify, because it is a dead the way, we are notifying you that you have been number or a dead phone or someone where the service hacked”. is not being provided? Sue Akers: No. Sue Akers: It is both. Chair: You say, “Give us a ring” and people may not want to ring the Metropolitan Police if you leave a Q29 Alun Michael: Are you able to say with message on their answering machine, saying, “Ring confidence that there is not a continuing service in the police”. Would you consider that— relation to those numbers? Sue Akers: To be honest, I have not been leaving the Sue Akers: Yes, I think we are. messages so I am not precisely sure what message has been left. Q30 Chair: Let us move on to some more factual points. Why is it that Strathclyde Police are bringing Q23 Chair: No, but you understand the point? charges under Motorman rather than the Metropolitan Sue Akers: Yes, I do. Police? Why do people have to go all the way up to Chair: It may be they just don’t know it is about Strathclyde to be charged? Why are you not dealing phone hacking, they may just think— with it, since it all comes from the same operation? Sue Akers: I suspect that the message that was left Sue Akers: I was not aware that Strathclyde were was very clear as to why. charging Motorman. I know they have an interest in Chair: Very clear, okay. Lorraine Fullbrook has a the case but I thought that was in respect of— question on notification. Q31 Chair: You do not know anyone who has been Q24 Lorraine Fullbrook: I want to know how much charged by Strathclyde Police? help you have been getting from the mobile telephone companies. Where you had a number but you did not Sue Akers: No. have a name or people have changed their numbers, how much help have you had from the telecoms Q32 Chair: Do you have access to the Operation companies? Millipede files? Sue Akers: I would say on behalf of the officers that Sue Akers: No. have been dealing with this that they have been dealing closely with the mobile phone companies and Q33 Chair: You don’t? Have you sought access to where they have been able to help they have, them? throughout the investigation. Whether it be in terms of Sue Akers: No. In fact, you need to remind me what gathering more evidence or whether it be in notifying the Operation Millipede files are. victims, the mobile phone companies have been Chair: I understand they are related to some of the helpful as far as they can be. investigations that are going on. Sue Akers: In Strathclyde? Q25 Lorraine Fullbrook: I do not understand that if Chair: No, generally. Could you look into this and you have numbers that you can’t marry up to come back to us? somebody why you can’t, because the mobile phone Sue Akers: Yes. If you can put something around the companies have this information going back years. operation name it might help.2 Sue Akers: You would have to ask the mobile phone companies why they can’t provide that, but we— Q34 Chair: Let us move on to the number of officers Lorraine Fullbrook: So they are not giving you who have been helping in these three inquiries. You much help then? have 19 officers in Tuleta, 96 in Weeting and 70 in Elveden. As I understand it, that is 185 officers and Q26 Chair: Why haven’t you asked the mobile civilians working on these three inquiries. Is that still phone companies this? the figure? Sue Akers: We have. For the people that haven’t been Sue Akers: Yes. contacted, perhaps you are under a misapprehension Chair: Or is it more or is it less? that where there are lots of orphaned telephone Sue Akers: No, 96 in Weeting, 70 in Elveden, 19 in numbers—numbers that are not attached to a name— Tuleta. we are trying to get subscriber checks on all of them. We certainly have not done that but where we have— 2 The witness later clarified: Op Millipede refers to a SOCA led operation which resulted in the conviction of an individual that is on police bail to us in one of the cases Q27 Lorraine Fullbrook: But you say of the 4,744 under Tuleta. The Senior Investigation Officer and his team you have only contacted 2,500. are fully aware of those details. cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [06-11-2012 14:43] Job: 023365 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/023365/023365_o001_db_HAC 04.09.12 Unauthorised tapping corrected.xml

Ev 4 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence

4 September 2012 Sue Akers QPM

Q35 Chair: Yes, those are the figures that I gave you. Mr Winnick: Eight. So you have 185 officers working with you at the Sue Akers: Eight have been charged on phone moment? hacking. Of course there have been six others— Sue Akers: Yes. Mr Winnick: So it is eight out of the 79? Sue Akers: There have been, of course, six others, Q36 Chair: Do you know what the total costs of the which I suppose I should have mentioned, that were three operations are at the moment? charged with perverting the course of justice in Sue Akers: This year, just under £9 million and we connection with our investigations into phone have projected costs over four years, which will be in hacking. the region of £40 million. Q44 Chair: Is that total 14? Q37 Chair: £40 million. Does it not cause you Mr Winnick: Fourteen? concern that even with £40 million of taxpayers’ Sue Akers: Yes. money—please don’t take this as criticism from me— half the people haven’t been notified and only nine Q45 Mr Winnick: Does the number arrested remain people have been charged? Is that a concern to you? 79? Sue Akers: No, it is not a concern to me. I think the Sue Akers: Yes. fact that people have been charged in Weeting represents the success of our investigation. Nobody Q46 Mr Winnick: So it is 14 out of 79. Would you has been charged yet in Elveden but neither have accept that it is extremely important and in the public people been—it is still under consideration. interest that despite all the public pressure and Chair: It is still ongoing. concern—parliamentary concern as well, obviously— the same criteria apply when it is decided by the Q38 Mr Clappison: On a different subject, you appropriate prosecution authorities for charges to be mentioned computer hacking in the course of your made? In other words, the case is such when it is remarks. What can you tell us about the progress of decided to make charges that the feeling is that there investigations on that, please? is a reasonable chance of a successful prosecution. Sue Akers: It is difficult for me to go into any detail, Sue Akers: That is the code for the Crown obviously, because it is an ongoing investigation, but Prosecution Service and that is the criteria that they there are seven people who are on bail in relation to will apply to their decisions, yes. computer hacking. Q47 Mr Winnick: If you ventured an opinion, would Q39 Mr Clappison: I know it is difficult for you but you accept that if indeed the criteria were weakened are you able to tell us generally what the nature of the in any way and charges were made that led to allegation is in those cases, the general character? unsuccessful prosecutions, it would certainly not be in Sue Akers: You will have seen, maybe, the Panorama the overall public interest? programme. There are inquiries in connection with Sue Akers: You have to let justice take its course. The that. It is difficult for me to go into much more detail. Crown Prosecution Service will make their decisions on the basis of the evidence and the public interest, Q40 Mr Clappison: Are you able to say anything and after that it is up to a judge and jury. about the characteristics of the seven people who are under investigation, what category they might fall Q48 Mr Winnick: So we are right in coming to the into? conclusion that the criteria, despite all the public Sue Akers: I suppose the general category you would interest and pressure, for prosecution in these cases say is private investigator, some of them ex-police. remain the same as in other cases? Sue Akers: Yes. Q41 Mr Clappison: Are there files with the CPS in relation to those matters or not? Q49 Mr Winnick: Thank you very much. In your Sue Akers: Yes.3 evidence to the Leveson inquiry, you said that Trinity Mirror, News International and Express Newspapers Q42 Mr Clappison: How many? were being investigated for corrupt payments to Sue Akers: There will be one file around the one job; officials. That is what you said? it will all relate to various individuals.4 Sue Akers: Yes.

Q43 Mr Winnick: Deputy Assistant Commissioner, Q50 Mr Winnick: Are there other organisations now you told the Chair in response to more than one involved in the investigation, apart from those? question from him that nine have been charged out of Sue Akers: Those are the organisations that I have the 72 who have been arrested. said publicly, and I think I should not go any further Sue Akers: Eight have been charged. than what is in the public domain. 3 The witness later clarified: There is no file yet with the CPS Q51 Mr Winnick: When you say you do not want to on this investigation, although we have had preliminary go any further, I do not want to press you when you discussion with the CPS in this regard. 4 The witness later clarified: See footnote 3, in response to consider that it would be inappropriate, Deputy Q41. CPS advice has been sought but no formal file has yet Assistant Commissioner, but you have mentioned been submitted. companies already to the Leveson inquiry. You are cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [06-11-2012 14:43] Job: 023365 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/023365/023365_o001_db_HAC 04.09.12 Unauthorised tapping corrected.xml

Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 5

4 September 2012 Sue Akers QPM saying, in effect, if I understand you, that there are Q57 Michael Ellis: How long do you think other companies but for some reason you do not want Operations Weeting and Elveden will need to to mention them today. continue? Sue Akers: I am certainly not ready to say anything Sue Akers: That is a very good question and it is one in the way that I did about the Mirror Group and the that I have been, I suppose, giving quite a lot of Express Group because our investigation is still thought to, not least because I am going to retire. An continuing. exit strategy is one of the most difficult of the issues. Mr Winnick: If that is the position, I will not press In terms of Weeting, the phone hacking is probably you further. Thank you. easier to see an end to because we now have people charged. That needs to take its course through the Q52 Michael Ellis: Deputy Assistant Commissioner courts. In terms of the corrupt payments, very much Akers, how many officers and staff do you currently depends on the co-operation of the papers that we are have on Operation Weeting? involved with. All the time that they disclose material Sue Akers: 96. to us it leads to further inquiries that we make, and, frankly, if we are uncovering corrupt police officers Q53 Michael Ellis: You have been involved in other we feel that we should continue to do that. But I take operations in the past in your career. Is that a large your point, there is an enormous amount of money number compared with other operations? being spent on this and a lot of police resource and, Sue Akers: I am not sure this operation can be post-Olympics, we are going to be in very tight compared with any that I have previously dealt with financial times and questions are going to be asked because it is quite— about how much longer you can let things run. Michael Ellis: It has highly unique characteristics. Sue Akers:—an extraordinary and complex Q58 Chair: I think we are asking that question today. investigation, not least because it is not just limited to How much longer are things going to run? the investigation. It involved as well that huge piece Sue Akers: Certainly on the phone hacking, it must of work around contacting victims and dealing with take its course through the criminal courts. massive disclosure obligations, which were brought about by civil actions that were being held in tandem. Q59 Michael Ellis: Once you charge people that is I would say that I have the resources, as a minimum the end of the matter as far as the police are concerned number, to deal with this investigation and move it and as far as those individuals are concerned, yes? along as swiftly as we would like, but compared Sue Akers: Yes. I think the way this should be brought with others— to a conclusion is a combination of us and the CPS sitting down to decide on the criminal justice outcomes and potentially parameters that you might Q54 Michael Ellis: It is an appropriate number, you want to put around any future investigations, plus, think. What about the rank of the officers involved? going forward, Lord Justice Leveson’s Do you have a number of officers of senior rank or recommendations. Then the Information are most of them detective constables and sergeants? Commissioner must get involved where there is not Can you say something about that? quite such serious criminality but, nonetheless, there Sue Akers: Yes, I can. I have a detective are breaches of privacy. superintendent in charge of each strand, so there are three of those, one dealing with the phone hacking, Q60 Michael Ellis: So we are talking months, are one dealing with corrupt payments and one dealing we? with the Tuleta offences. They each have a detective Sue Akers: Although we are decreasing the number chief inspector and a small number of detective of resources, we have factored the next three years inspectors. The rest are sergeants, constables and a into our budget. fair number of police staff.5 Michael Ellis: I see. Q61 Chair: Are you telling the Committee that you Sue Akers: Sorry, I should say I have a detective chief are winding down the operation, bearing in mind there superintendent who oversees or hovers above all three is a resource implication and also the fact that you of the detective superintendents. have contacted everyone that you humanly can contact? Q55 Michael Ellis: So he is your deputy, is he, a Sue Akers: Winding down is probably not how I detective chief superintendent? would describe it. We are now prioritising on case Sue Akers: He is my deputy. building and getting our cases through the court. Certainly we feel we have gone as far as we can on Q56 Michael Ellis: So there is yourself, a detective the victim notification, but there is still— chief superintendent and three superintendents. They have chief inspectors below them and then below that Q62 Michael Ellis: So you do not anticipate a greater there are inspectors, sergeants and constables?6 need for resources? Sue Akers: Yes. Sue Akers: No. I always caveat that, because a lot of 5 The witness later clarified: Operation Tuleta does not have a the additional work that we had on Elveden was DCI—only Weeting and Elveden brought about because News International did their 6 See correction to Q54 own internal review of the Sun and then presented us cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [06-11-2012 14:43] Job: 023365 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/023365/023365_o001_db_HAC 04.09.12 Unauthorised tapping corrected.xml

Ev 6 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence

4 September 2012 Sue Akers QPM with evidence. At the moment we do not anticipate journalistic material even if it is in furtherance of a any more. criminal offence. For instance, the analogy I suppose is with material that attracts legal professional Q63 Chair: Are you pleased with the co-operation privilege. You can access that if it has been in you have received from News International? Have furtherance of a criminal offence; you can’t with they been co-operative with you? Other journalistic material. Then you have to deal with commissioners have said in the past they have not schedule 1, and in doing that, some of the conditions been co-operative with them. before you can get a production order are that you Sue Akers: I think you can’t compare the co-operation have tried other means, one of which would be that that we have had to the co-operation that my former you had asked for the co-operation of the organisation. colleagues had. Where you have evidence or no absence of evidence of a lack of co-operation, our legal advice is that you, Q64 Michael Ellis: Are you receiving co-operation therefore, are unlikely to obtain a production order. So from other news organisations? the reason that we have had some success is because Sue Akers: Yes, we have drawn up a protocol with we have had the co-operation of News International, Express Newspapers and we have— which certainly did not exist for my colleagues who Michael Ellis: Thank you. went before.

Q65 Alun Michael: Before I go on to a question of Q71 Alun Michael: This is important because, of law, can I make sure that we have understood what course, there is the question of possible future you are investigating. Am I right in thinking that organisations that might not wish to co-operate. It many mobile phones—particularly when you go back sounds as if you are talking about legal obstacles, over a five-year period—will be disused, will have which is what I asked about, not technical obstacles. been used for a short period of time and no longer Sue Akers: No, legal. have a user, so it is not a question of looking for somebody, it is that there is nobody that exists? Q72 Alun Michael: I wonder if you might Sue Akers: In some cases, yes. supplement your response on this perhaps in writing to us afterwards. I think the question of where the Q66 Alun Michael: When we are talking about the obstacles lie and what your legal advice is and so on numbers that you have contacted and then the would be very helpful to Parliament because, clearly, numbers that you have not been able to contact, it is there are places where the protection of journalistic not necessarily that there is an individual that you are sources is important, just as the protection of police not able to contact, it is that there is a phone number information—as with an earlier answer that you that was in use at a particular time, and is therefore gave—is important. The question is where the line is recorded in the information available to you, but you drawn. Would that be something that you could are not able to find somebody actually using that supplement for the Committee? number now? Sue Akers: Certainly. I would be very happy to do so. Sue Akers: We are not able to then advance because it is such a common name or it is— Q73 Alun Michael: Just one other point. It does seem very often that the requirements on investigators Q67 Alun Michael: Yes. So you are not able to track in the way that cases have to be brought forward, with back in the history and you are not able to find an issues of disclosure and all sorts of things, are extant user? complicated. Are there procedural problems, in terms Sue Akers: Yes. of the obstacles in your path and the path of the Crown Prosecution Service in taking forward the files Q68 Alun Michael: So it is not that there is a big you provide to them, that are making it difficult for pool of people who should be contacted, it is that you prosecutions to be successfully pursued? have got pretty close to the end of what it is Sue Akers: It is probably too early to say whether reasonable to do? they are going to be successfully pursued. I think the Sue Akers: I think we would say we have taken all problems just lie in the vast quantity of material that the reasonable steps that we can and decided that we we have and, therefore, our obligations on disclosure can’t go beyond that. to make sure that we do not have in existence anything that would undermine a prosecution. Q69 Alun Michael: Thank you. Can you give us a sense of what you feel about the law as it stands at Q74 Alun Michael: In terms of the practicalities, that the moment? Does it enable you to investigate these will come in the fullness of time, but are there any cases effectively? Are there deficiencies in the law cases where you end up talking to the Crown that make your job more difficult? Prosecution Service and the Crown Prosecution Sue Akers: Yes. Service are saying, “Looking at the file, it would be really nice to prosecute that but we know that the Q70 Alun Michael: Could you spell them out? obstacles in the way of succeeding with it mean that Sue Akers: Yes, I will try to. The difficulties for us— it is not worth pursuing”? the challenges—lie in accessing journalistic material Sue Akers: I am sure there are many occasions when because when the Police and Criminal Evidence Act we look at things where we think we know where the was drawn up, for some reason we can’t get at truth lies but for one reason or another, we can’t— cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [O] Processed: [06-11-2012 14:43] Job: 023365 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/023365/023365_o001_db_HAC 04.09.12 Unauthorised tapping corrected.xml

Home Affairs Committee: Evidence Ev 7

4 September 2012 Sue Akers QPM

Alun Michael: Again, if there are procedural and you have tended to give them your blessing—that obstacles that could be identified in the cases you are they could not have done better because they did not dealing with, could we have some information about have the co-operation of News International. But this that to the Committee? Committee has looked at the issue for a number of Chair: It would be extremely helpful, if you could years and you have actually come up with results, write to us. whereas the Yates, the Clarke and the Hayman inquiries suddenly stopped. I am sure you have seen Q75 Dr Huppert: There is obviously organised our reports in which we criticised the way those criminality around some of this. There is also an issue inquiries took place. Why have you managed to do so about mobile phone companies not making it well—you have actually charged people—as opposed sufficiently hard for people to hack in. Have you been to your predecessors? talking to the mobile phone companies about the Sue Akers: I have probably said it but I will repeat security that they provide, and are you comfortable it. We had this unprecedented relationship with News that they are now providing the levels of security that International, who set up the management standards we ought to expect? committee, their independent body, to investigate Sue Akers: Yes. Each of them has a different way of what had gone on, and they were prepared to disclose operating, so as we have uncovered our evidence as documents to us in a way that they had not been in our investigation has progressed, we have made sure years gone by. That, coupled with the resources that I that we alert the mobile phone companies to that so have been given to deal with this, enabled us to take that they can design their systems to take cognisance the inquiry to places where previously they could not of what we are uncovering and make them more have done. secure. Q80 Chair: I know you are not talking about Q76 Dr Huppert: Do you think it would be hard for winding down the inquiry, but you seem to be telling a journalist without specialised training to try to do the Committee that the end game is in sight, in the the same activities again? sense that you will have done your job, based on the Sue Akers: I would be amazed if it was not much information you have received. I think you mentioned more difficult. to Lord Justice Leveson that you had between 8 and 12 terabytes of information. I asked the Library to tell Q77 Nicola Blackwood: It is reassuring that we are me what a terabyte was because I don’t know. now dealing with all of this evidence and actually Sue Akers: It is huge. seeing arrests, but I think what everybody would like Chair: It is 450 million typed pages of information, to know is whether in the course of these and the information that you have talked about, which investigations, you have uncovered any evidence that is 12 terabytes, is 1 million telephone directories. That phone hacking is still going on anywhere and whether is a huge amount of information that your officers you think that this is still a problem? Obviously your have tried to look at. It is not just a question of ringing answers to Mr Michael and Dr Huppert are helpful— up people to see if they are still there. A million whether there needs to be different legislation, telephone books is a huge amount of information. whether there are issues of mobile phone security that are relevant—but the real question is what is the Have you come to the end of that or are you going to situation now, in your opinion? be in a position, like your predecessors, where—as we Sue Akers: We are reasonably confident that phone found out in our inquiry—there were lots of files that hacking is not carrying on now. Some of that will be, remained unopened? Have all the files been opened I hope, to do with our activity, but a lot as well around now? the mobile phones and the security that they have put Sue Akers: Certainly what we are not doing with all in place. Having said that, things always move on; of that—as you can imagine, you have just described phone hacking may not be a problem but something the quantity of it—is going through line by line. This else may be. is material that is largely on IT systems. What we are having to try to do is be smart around the way we Q78 Nicola Blackwood: Do you think that there is a search that material, using key words to search that temporary deterrent effect because of the current we hope will draw out evidence. But inevitably in that media focus on this operation and on the hacking amount, there will be material that we miss I am sure. scandal and the Leveson inquiry and so on, or do you think that there has genuinely been a sea change in Q81 Chair: You have a huge amount of expertise in attitudes within the media and within the public as a this. Who is going to take over? We clearly do not result of this scandal? want somebody absolutely new who does not know Sue Akers: Probably Lord Justice Leveson is better what is going on. Has there been a transition period? able to give an opinion on that from all the evidence You announced in May this year that you were going he has heard, but I think there has been a sea change to stand down from the Metropolitan Police after and we do not have any evidence of phone hacking many years of distinguished service. We are currently taking place. concerned that the person who takes over is not going to start all this again. Q79 Chair: Deputy Assistant Commissioner, you Sue Akers: No, absolutely. But you should not be have several times mentioned today your predecessors concerned, because the officers on the team are superb who had charge of the general issue of phone hacking, detectives and they will work— cobber Pack: U PL: COE1 [E] Processed: [06-11-2012 14:43] Job: 023365 Unit: PG01 Source: /MILES/PKU/INPUT/023365/023365_o001_db_HAC 04.09.12 Unauthorised tapping corrected.xml

Ev 8 Home Affairs Committee: Evidence

4 September 2012 Sue Akers QPM

Q82 Chair: Who will take over? Who will take you welcome the rules that have been brought in about your job? relationships between police officers and journalists, Sue Akers: Another ACPO officer has been identified and the hospitality and other rules? and he will— Sue Akers: I think probably because of where we had Chair: Sorry, who is that? got to it was necessary to introduce them. In the Sue Akers: DAC Steve Kavanagh. fullness of time we may see them relax slightly. Sometimes you need to pull something a bit further Q83 Chair: Where is he at the moment? than you need to in order to stamp your mark on Sue Akers: At the moment he is in territorial policing things before you can relax things. I would like to but will— think we can get back to a position where people are Chair: So he is at the Met at the moment, is he? trusted a little more. Sue Akers: Yes, but he will be moving to a position where he is able to oversee. In terms of ACPO Q87 Chair: In respect of the article in today’s Times oversight, my role has largely been the public face, to about your meetings, do you want to go on the record come to your Committees, to go to Leveson, to deal with what that was all about? with the overall supervision and to deal with key Sue Akers: I am happy to. In my view, it is a complete stakeholders, and some conflict. I am optimistic that lot of nonsense but sometimes journalists like to make by the time I leave at the end of next month, mischief and that is what happened. As you say, my appearances here and before Lord Justice Leveson impending retirement was well publicised way back. will be finished, we will be moving towards case Various people have been in touch to say, “Can we building and trials, and there will be no need for the meet up before you leave?” Elizabeth Filkin was one amount of scrutiny and oversight that I have had to of the people who kindly invited me to lunch. It was put in because we will be in a place where— a private lunch and, as she said, inexpensive.

Q84 Chair: Presumably you are leaving your phone Q88 Chair: What are you going to do next? You are number so they can ring you in case they have any not going to take up an article in News International, questions? like one of your predecessors? Sue Akers: Of course. Sue Akers: I can confidently tell you I will not be doing that. Q85 Chair: On the issue of the Met, since this is your last appearance before this Committee and you Q89 Chair: One final question about the number of have obviously seen a lot of changes over the years, senior police officers who have been leaving the Met. what is morale like at the moment in the Lynne Owens, of course, has gone. You are among the Metropolitan Police? most senior women officers. Over the years, do you Sue Akers: It is tough, I think. There is an immense think that there is a bar to women getting the very top amount of pressure on officers. I can say this because jobs in the police force or do you think that is I take absolutely no credit whatsoever for any part in changing? You have obviously got there, but what public order, Olympics or anything. As a member of about the future? the public watching the Olympics, I was hugely proud Sue Akers: I don’t think that there is a bar now on of the organisation and what it did. You don’t see women going to the top. This might be slightly much recognition of that from anybody, really. I think controversial, but I think sometimes women look at probably that is the way we try to do it. We try to be, the top and decide they don’t really want to be there. “This is about the Olympics, it is about the athletes Chair: Thank you very much for giving evidence and not about the security.” Nevertheless, I think it today. On behalf of the Committee, I thank you for all was a remarkable three weeks. the work you have done on these various operations. Chair: Yes. When your appointment was announced in Sue Akers: Then Notting Hill Carnival and now the Parliament, those on all sides of the House were full Paralympics. Officers are tired and are under pressure of praise for the appointment and the work you have to continue, so— done. I wish you well on behalf of the Committee in your retirement. Q86 Chair: In terms of the rules and ethics that are Sue Akers: Thank you, Chair. now in existence, do you think they are too tough? Do Chair: Thank you very much.

© Parliamentary Copyright House of Commons 2012 This publication may be reproduced under the terms of the Open Parliament Licence, which is published at www.parliament.uk/site-information/copyright/

Printed in the United Kingdom by The Stationery Office Limited 11/2012 023365 19585