Lib Dems divide in Government's tuition fee vote victory

PROPOSED MOTION
That, for the purpose of section 24 of the Higher Education Act 2004, the higher amount should be increased to £9,000, and to £4,500 in the cases described in regulation 5 of the draft regulations in Command Paper Cm 7986, and that the increase should take effect from 1 September 2012.
Result: Ayes (for) 323 Noes (against) 302
Government majority: 21

TUITION fees at some universities could rise to as much as £9,000 a year after the coalition government survived a backbench rebellion to win a narrow victory.

The government had its majority cut by three-quarters as 21 Lib Dem MPs and six Conservative MPs opposed the motion in the Commons last week.

But the support of Lib Dem ministers, gained earlier in the week when party leader Nick Clegg earned some concessions, was vital in pushing through the measure.

That support will prove controversial at a grassroots level in the party as the original coalition agreement allowed Lib Dems to abstain.

However, with the measure having been introduced by Business Secretary Vince Cable, a Lib Dem, the Tories accused their junior coalition partners of not putting their whole weight behind the government.

As a result, Deputy Prime Minister Mr Clegg got all of his ministers on side but this meant there was a clear three-way split at the highest levels of his party.

While Mr Clegg, Mr Cable and the other ministers voted for a rise in tuition fees, party president Tim Farron was among the 21 Lib Dem MPs to vote against.

Deputy leader of the party Simon Hughes abstained along with five others and two MPs - Chris Huhne and Martin Horwood - were at the Cancun climate summit and could not attend.

Calls for unity by Mr Clegg look optimistic at best and the split between front-bench and back-bench Lib Dem MPs has damaged the party in the public eye.

Moreover, the fact that the measure ultimately relied on Lib Dem support hardly helped either.

Energy Secretary Mr Huhne admitted so much in saying that the party was "going to go through a period of immense unpopularity".

And the vote seems to have had an effect on the Lib Dems' already dreadful poll rating as it tumbled even further last week.

A showing of just 8% in YouGov's daily tracker last Wednesday was their lowest level of support for the party since September 1990.

If the figure was applied in a general election, the Lib Dems would be left with just a handful of seats, and it is becoming harder and harder for many supporters to see the value of them being in this coalition.

Indeed, former director of policy Richard Grayson has suggested the Lib Dems have moved too far to the right and need to re-engage with Labour.

Ed Miliband, the recently-elected Labour leader, acted swiftly on Mr Grayson's article, offering Lib Dems the chance to have an input on Labour's policy review.

But, even Mr Farron, who voted against the rise in fees, called the move "desperate" and it certainly looks that way as Mr Miliband deals with some early struggles.

Although Labour remain steady in the polls, unlike the flailing Lib Dems, members of Mr Miliband's own party still seem uncertain about his position.

Anthony Wells on UK Polling report writes: "19% of current Labour supporters and 21% of people who voted Labour in 2010 think that Ed Miliband isn’t up to it. 23% of Labour supporters aren’t sure.

"Asked whether Ed or David Miliband would have made the better leader, 36% of Labour supporters think David would have been better, 26% think Ed was the right choice."

Ed Miliband's weak performances as the Despatch Box in Prime Minister's Questions will not have helped.

But his low personal rating can be probably more easily attributed to his party's incoherence on this issue of tuition fees.

Mr Miliband and his Shadow Chancellor Alan Johnson took opposing views on the alternative policy of a graduate tax before Mr Johnson made an unconvincing U-turn to support his leader.

In the supposed new era for the party which went beyond the rivalry of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown - and against an unpopular coalition policy to boot - Labour looked lost in opposition.

Only the Conservatives can be happy with the way the vote went and - even then - it was a stark reminder of their failure to gain an overall majority and the resultant reliance on the Lib Dems.

It should also be noted that the policy was not unanimously supported by the Tories with former party leadership candidate David Davis the highest-profile of the six rebels.

Mr Davis comes from a working class background and said he was worried that the enormous fees - while not paid up front - would still put off genuinely talented people from going to university.

This opposition from the likes of Mr Davies, and former Lib Dem leaders Charles Kennedy and Menzies Campbell, suggests to me that the motion to defer the decision should have also been put to the vote.

But the speaker John Bercow rejected this alternative and so died the last remaining hope for students, school pupils and academic staff.

Unsurprisingly, the result saw the all-day student protest in London take a turn for the worse.

The stories in the newspapers centred on this and the news-desks got their 'money-shot' when Prince Charles and Camilla, showing incredibly little tact, were caught up in the violence in their car.

Elsewhere, the statue of Winston Churchill was shamefully daubed with graffiti while Charlie Gilmour - the son of Pink Floyd guitarist David - was arrested after climbing on the Cenotaph and appearing to tear the Union flag. He has since apologised.

However, the media focus on the violence meant that valid arguments by peacefully protesting students were largely ignored.

Then, there was the inevitable over-reaction to events. The Daily Mail wrote that Metropolitan Police chief Sir Paul Stephenson implied the protesters were lucky not to be shot, and Home Secretary Theresa May decried the "appalling level of violence".

But Ms May must know that this was nowhere near as bad as the series of scuffles surrounding the Miners' Strike in 1984-85 or the Poll Tax riots in 1990.

What it did show is that, while the government may have won the vote against an unfocused opposition inside the House, they seem to have lost the argument outside of it.

That has already been bad news for the Lib Dems but the pressure may yet start to tell on the Tories - and Ms May might start to see something closer to the reality of her original quote.


FOR THE RECORD: HOW THEY VOTED
LIB DEMS VOTING FOR TUITION FEE RISES (28)
All Liberal Democrat ministers present voted for a rise in tuition fees including Vince Cable, the Business Secretary who tabled the motion, Deputy PM and Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg, and Chief Secretary to the Treasury Danny Alexander. Government Whip Mark Hunter was a teller which means he supported the government but his name will not appear on the "yes" division list in Hansard.
Danny Alexander (Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey)
Norman Baker (Lewes)
Sir Alan Beith (Berwick-upon-Tweed)
Gordon Birtwistle (Burnley)
Tom Brake (Carshalton & Wallington)
Jeremy Browne (Taunton Deane)
Malcolm Bruce (Gordon)
Paul Burstow (Sutton & Cheam)
Vincent Cable (Twickenham)
Alistair Carmichael (Orkney & Shetland)
Nick Clegg (Sheffield Hallam)
Edward Davey (Kingston & Surbiton)
Lynne Featherstone (Hornsey & Wood Green)
Don Foster (Bath)
Stephen Gilbert (St Austell and Newquay)
Duncan Hames (Chippenham)
Nick Harvey (Devon North)
David Heath (Somerton & Frome)
John Hemming (Birmingham Yardley)
Mark Hunter (Cheadle)
Norman Lamb (Norfolk North)
David Laws (Yeovil)
Michael Moore (Berwickshire, Roxburgh & Selkirk)
Andrew Stunell (Hazel Grove)
Jo Swinson (Dunbartonshire East)
Sarah Teather (Brent Central)
David Ward (Bradford East)
Steve Webb (Thornbury and Yate)

LIB DEMS VOTING AGAINST TUITION FEE RISES (21)
Former Lib Dem leaders Sir Menzies Campbell and Charles Kennedy voted against the rise in tuition fees. Michael Crockart resigned his position as parliamentary aide to Michael Moore, the Scottish Secretary. Jenny Willott resigned her position as parliamentary aide to Chris Huhne, the Energy and Climate Secretary.
Annette Brooke (Dorset Mid & Poole North)
Sir Menzies Campbell (Fife North East)
Michael Crockart (Edinburgh West)
Tim Farron (Westmorland & Lonsdale)
Andrew George (St Ives)
Mike Hancock (Portsmouth South)
Julian Huppert (Cambridge)
Charles Kennedy (Ross, Skye & Lochaber)
John Leech (Manchester Withington)
Stephen Lloyd (Eastbourne)
Greg Mulholland (Leeds North West)
John Pugh (Southport)
Alan Reid (Argyll & Bute)
Dan Rogerson (Cornwall North)
Bob Russell (Colchester)
Adrian Sanders (Torbay)
Ian Swales (Redcar)
Mark Williams (Ceredigion)
Roger Williams (Brecon and Radnorshire)
Jenny Willott (Cardiff Central)
Simon Wright (Norwich South)

LIB DEMS WHO DID NOT VOTE (8)
Eight Liberal Democrat MPs did not vote. Six abstained and another two - Martin Horwood and Chris Huhne - were abroad in Cancun for the climate change conference. Horwood is expected to have voted against the proposals but Huhne, as a minister, would have voted for.
Lorely Burt (Solihull), abstained
Martin Horwood (Cheltenham), abroad
Simon Hughes (Bermondsey & Old Southwark), abstained
Chris Huhne (Eastleigh), abroad
Tessa Munt (Wells), abstained
Sir Robert Smith (Aberdeenshire W and Kincardine), abstained
John Thurso (Caithness, Sutherland & Easter Ross), abstained
Stephen Williams (Bristol West), abstained

TORY REBELS VOTING AGAINST RISE IN TUITION FEES (6)
There were six Conservative MPs who voted against the rise in tuition fees. Additionally, Lee Scott resigned as parliamentary aide to Transport Secretary Philip Hammond, having abstained from voting. For the record, the rebels were:
Philip Davies (Shipley)
David Davis (Haltemprice and Howden)
Julian Lewis (New Forest East)
Jason McCartney (Colne Valley)
Andrew Percy (Brigg & Goole)
Mark Reckless (Rochester and Strood)

The Season 2010/11 - Newcastle humiliate Sunderland in Hallowe'en massacre

Newcastle United 5 Nolan 26, 34, 75; Ameobi 45+4 (pen), 70
Sunderland 1 Bent 90

A BRUTAL massacre took place at St James Park today as Chris Hughton's Newcastle United humiliated local rivals Sunderland in the 142nd Tyne-Wear derby.

Kevin Nolan scored the first hat-trick in the fixture for 25 years with Shola Ameobi scoring twice as United hammered Steve Bruce's men.

This was indeed a horror show for Sunderland and 51,988 people bore witness to the front pairing of Ameobi and Andy Carroll combining brilliantly all afternoon for Newcastle.

Ameobi and Carroll even showed a hitherto unforeseen turn of pace to terrorise the Sunderland defence, winning countless free-kicks and corners for the excellent Joey Barton and allowing Nolan to lurk in the box.

Then, when he got his chances, former Bolton Wanderers man Nolan finished with deadly accuracy, emulating Peter Beardsley's three-goal haul in January 1985.

He opened the scoring on 26 minutes, hooking the ball beyond three Sunderland defenders on the line after it had fallen to him invitingly from Mike Williamson's header off a corner.

And he made it 2-0 shortly afterwards, slotting home unmarked from 12 yards after the ball had broken to him from Carroll's attempted scissor kick.

Earlier in the move, Ameobi had carried the ball from the half-way line to the edge of the box with a surging run past three men before laying it off to Jonas Gutierrez to cross for Carroll.

With half-time fast approaching, a very good half turned for United into a dream one as yet more direct running, this time from Gutierrez, caused yet more panic in the Sunderland backline.

Argentine winger Gutierrez was only halted by a clumsy challenge from Nedum Onuoha and Ameobi stepped up to make it 3-0 from the spot, much to Nolan's chagrin.

Nolan would eventually get his hat-trick but first he had to wait for Ameobi to score his second, and the best goal of the day.

Danny Simpson delivered a fine cross from the right but the unfortunate Carroll smacked his header off the bar.

The ball fell to Ameobi on the edge of the box and he smashed an unstoppable rebound high into the net past Sunderland keeper Simon Mignolet.

With fully 15 minutes left, it was 5-0 as Nolan completed his hat-trick and Newcastle eyed a repeat of their earlier win this season over Aston Villa.

Once again, Barton delivered an accurate cross from a corner and again it was flicked on by Ameobi for Nolan to win the second header and send it goal-wards.

In the end, the repeat of the Villa result never materialised as Newcastle stepped off the gas and toyed with their opponents for the final quarter of an hour.

Darren Bent scored a last-minute consolation for the Black Cats' ten men, reacting quickly to a loose ball from a corner to volley past Tim Krul.

But, make no mistake about it, Sunderland had been second best all afternoon as Corbridge-born manager Bruce painfully had to admit.

It had not helped that they had played most of the second half a man down after former Magpie Titus Bramble had been sent off for a last-man challenge on Carroll.

However, this was just the icing on the cake for many Geordies who suffered five seasons of his shambolic performances earlier in his career.

An incredible but fully deserved 5-1 win, then - though, in some ways, this result should have been expected considering the Magpies' totally unpredictable season so far.

Hughton's team had enjoyed victory in the league three times before today - 6-0 against Aston Villa at home, and away at Everton and West Ham United. Newcastle also won 4-3 against Chelsea at Stamford Bridge in the League Cup.

However, a rather Jekyll and Hyde start had seen successive home games without a win against Blackpool, Stoke City and Wigan Athletic in the league, and Arsenal in the cup.

Media rumours that Hughton was living on borrowed time prompted the club to release a statement denying anything was afoot and new contract negotiations would open in the New Year.

But that whole episode smacked of a panicked media construct with the press pack left without a story after the recent situations at Anfield and Old Trafford had been resolved.

Indeed the first newspaper to suggest any doubts was the Daily Mail. Their motive? Well, they have been banned from St James Park for the last two seasons.

Sadly, the story was perpetuated in the Sunday weeklies where it gained momentum with also-banned former Newcastle Evening Chronicle gobshite Alan Oliver at the forefront in the People. More disappointingly still, even the BBC got caught up in the non-story.

It is safe to say that this arbitrary line of attack has been closed off for now after a wonderful performance, full of flair and attacking verve.

Indeed, from their 14 league and cup games so far this season, Newcastle have scored 26 goals and conceded 23, a combined average of 3.5 goals per game.

It would seem that Hughton has overseen the return of the Entertainers except now there is a new King Kev at the helm.

Election 2010: Clegg comes under attack from Tory press

LIBERAL DEMOCRATS leader Nick Clegg has come under fire from Tory-supporting newspapers in the run-up to the second leaders debate tonight on Sky at 8pm.

Mr Clegg's impressive performance in the first debate last week on ITV produced an unexpected shift change in the British political scene ahead of the general election on 6th May.

The Lib Dems, so long considered as the third-placed party, even took the lead in a couple of opinion polls conducted after the contest.

And, although the Conservatives still hold a narrow lead in most of the polls, none of them suggests David Cameron's party will win an overall majority.

The Tories are worried that, despite opposing a deeply unpopular government, the presence of Mr Clegg and a strong third party further reduces the chances of them getting that majority.

So it is no surprise to see attacks mauling the Lib Dem leader from the Daily Telegraph and the Daily Mail have been released on the day of the second debate.

The Telegraph accuses Mr Clegg of receiving payments from party donors into his personal bank account, a potentially damaging headline.

But Mr Clegg has denied any wrongdoing, saying that the money helped pay for a researcher. He says he had declared the donations to the parliamentary authorities and that he would publish the figures to prove it.

Meanwhile, the Mail laughably falls foul of Godwin's Law, an observation first made by Mike Godwin in 1990.

Godwin's Law states, "As an (online) discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one."

In their article, the Mail criticises Mr Clegg - in what they describe as a "Nazi slur" - for his suggestion back in 2002 that Britain holds "a misplaced sense of superiority" over Germany since World War II.

But, despite the Mail's insinuation, Mr Clegg holds a legitimate opinion which does not denigrate the magnificent achievement of the British forces in WW2. Those two views are not mutually exclusive.

The fact that the Mail seems to have trawled through every statement from Mr Clegg going back years shows how far the Tory press is willing to go in trying to discredit his campaign.

It also shows how concerned the Conservatives are - surely Mr Cameron should be racing ahead in the polls against a tired and unpopular government of 13 years?

The uncomfortable fact for the Tories is that their own popularity has never recovered by a large enough extent to make this election an easy win.

Of course, the mathematics are also against the Conservatives. Mr Cameron's party needs to win no fewer than 116 seats in addition to those which they already hold under the first past the post system.

But it is the same system which has provided the Conservatives - and Labour - with huge majorities in the past, and one which the Conservatives have no plans to change.

After 13 years in power with those big majorities, incumbent Gordon Brown has promised a referendum on voting reform in the Labour manifesto in a bid to woo the Lib Dems.

Mr Clegg has so far rejected any advances from Mr Brown, and he seems unlikely to prop up the ailing Labour administration, calling Mr Brown "a desperate politician".

But advisers claim the Labour leader is confident ahead of the second debate on foreign affairs as he believe it will allow him to expose both of his opponents' inexperience on the world stage.

The second half of the 90 minutes is an open forum and that could prove more troublesome for Mr Brown.

Continued high petrol prices contributed to inflation rising to 3.4% this week, while the latest unemployment data show a rise of 43,000 to 2.5million, 8% of the workforce.

Mr Brown will be consoled that figures from the British Crime Survey and police records show a 7% year-on-year fall in all crimes in 2009.

But those statistics will be of little comfort to shadow defence spokesman Liam Fox whose laptop and car were stolen after a burglary at his central London home.

It caps a bad couple of days on a personal level for the Conservatives, coming after Mr Cameron had an egg thrown at him by a student in a college in Cornwall.

Mr Cameron laughed off the incident with good grace but he must be left wondering why the country's clear desire for change has not yet decisively swung in his party's direction.

"It's absolutely true because I read it in the Daily Mail..."

Dananddan films showing that if you've got a reputation like the Daily Mail has, it really does precede you...

See also: Mailwatch and, of course, the Daily Mail headline generator.

Forty years of The Sun

THE SUN celebrated forty years as a tabloid today in typically brash style with pull-outs, celebrity interviews and prime-time television advertisements.

It has a chequered history, to say the least, but remains Britain's most popular daily with just under three million sales and a readership of almost eight million.

The tabloid version of the paper was actually pre-dated by a broadsheet which had replaced the loss-making Daily Herald in 1964.

The broadsheet continued to lose circulation and money which led to owners International Press Corporation putting it up for sale.

Enter Rupert Murdoch. He had recently acquired the News Of The World and was looking to add a daily as a stable mate.

The Daily Herald had been a Labour-supporting newspaper and Murdoch vowed to retain its political allegiance, appointing socialist Larry Lamb as its first editor.

But that all changed in the late 1970s when the James Callaghan government stumbled from one crisis to the next.

The Sun switched sides in the run-up to the 1979 election and left its readers in no doubt that it thought they should do the same.

'Vote Tory This Time' was its unequivocal headline and the public duly did so, giving Margaret Thatcher a landslide election win.

Kelvin McKenzie became editor in 1981 and remained loyal to the Conservatives throughout Mrs Thatcher's premiership in the 1980s.

Notably, it supported the government during the Miners' Strike and, later in the decade, the introduction of the poll tax which would effectively bring to an end the Thatcher era.

The 1980s would also feature a circulation war between The Sun and The Daily Mirror with price cuts and an emphasis on brash headlines.

The battle with The Daily Mirror explains, partly at least, why The Sun became more jingoistic than previously.

On the sinking of Argentine gunboat Belgrano during the Falklands War, 'Gotcha' was the front-page headline.

Labour leaders Michael Foot and Neil Kinnock were lampooned mercilessly alongside other figures on the Left of British politics.

Mr Foot was judged as being too old before the 1983 election but The Sun supported the re-election of conservative Ronald Reagan to the US Presidency a year later.

This was despite the fact that President Reagan was two years older than Mr Foot.

During the Miners' Strike, The Sun prepared a front-page with a photograph which made Trade Union leader Arthur Scargill look like he was doing Nazi salute.

The printers, in disgust, refused to publish it. But they would be the next victims when Murdoch moved the paper to Wapping and nearly all of them lost their jobs.

On the back pages, England football manager Bobby Robson also suffered as a result of the tabloid war with false allegations about his private life.

After a 0-0 draw with Saudi Arabia in the build-up to World Cup 1990, the paper pleaded, 'In The Name Of Allah, Go!' Robson would lead England to the semi-finals.

His successor Graham Taylor got an even worse press as an ageing England team struggled at the Euro 92 finals and failed to qualify for World Cup 1994.

After failing to beat Sweden in 1992, Taylor was branded a 'turnip'. His face was super-imposed on a picture of a turnip on account he could not beat the Swedes, a pun on the other root vegetable.

It was an image which stuck in the mind of the public and, undoubtedly, it dealt a blow to Taylor's reputation for the rest of his time in charge.

But McKenzie's most shameful football moment came in 1989 when, under the headline 'The Truth', The Sun reported on the tragic events at Hillsborough Stadium.

It blamed Liverpool fans for causing a crush which killed 92 people and accused the fans of robbing the victims and preventing them from receiving help even though the opposite was true.

The Sun's sales figures on Liverpool have never recovered since, even when the paper hit its record high circulation in November 1995 of 4.8 million copies.

The birth of the Internet and 24-hour news broadcasts put an end to those kinds of figures. But The Sun remains powerful in political circles.

After its switch in 1979 and the successful prediction in 1992 that John Major would gain an unlikely election victory, The Sun has always liked to look as if it is backing a winner.

In the run up to the 1997 election, New Labour director of communication Alastair Campbell held meetings with Murdoch to ensure Tony Blair would get the paper's endorsement.

Like Mrs Thatcher 18 years before him, Mr Blair was elected by a landslide.

Mr Blair retained The Sun's support throughout his premiership as he disgruntled many in his party faithful by mainly pursuing Thatcherite policies such as privatisation.

More recently, of course, The Sun has returned to supporting the Conservatives at the next election with the front-page headline 'Labour's Lost It'.

This is a recognition that Mr Blair's replacement Gordon Brown is looking as beleaguered a figure as Mr Major in 1997 and The Sun dare not risk supporting him.

Their move is still a risk - there are months until election day and polls suggest that the public remain somewhat sceptical of David Cameron's Conservatives.

A recent attempt by The Sun to smear Mr Brown's sincerity towards the troops in Iraq and Afghanistan also back-fired.

The story came about after Mr Brown wrote an untidy letter with several spelling mistakes to a recently bereaved family of a soldier.

But most people have felt it unreasonable to criticise the PM for his poor handwriting on account of his poor eyesight and indeed praised him for his sincerity in writing to each of the bereaved soldiers' families personally.

So... political flip-flopping, jingoism, fabrication, smears. How does The Sun remain so popular?

Well, I think personally that it remains an entertaining read. In particular, it has continued its tradition of memorable headlines in recent years.

'How Do You Solve A Problem Like Korea' when North Korea tested a nuclear weapon and 'Super Cally Go Ballistic, Celtic are Atrocious' when Inverness beat Celtic in the Scottish Cup stick out.

Also, many of its mainly male readership will buy the paper for its extensive football coverage, and some others just to ogle at Page 3, rather than its right-wing political coverage.

Its status as Britain's biggest-selling daily is in some ways self-fulfilling as PR firms flock to get their celebrity client an interview or their book serialised.

This has become particularly evident since the advent and subsequent popularity of telly talent contest such as the X Factor and Britain's Got Talent.

To its credit, The Sun provides unmatched offers to its readers with the most famous being the annual £9.50 holiday giveaways.

Campaigns such as the Help For Heroes charity and the long-running Free Books for Schools also hit a public note.

Finally, its website is now much-improved from the untidy effort with which it began.

Figures showing that there were 22,994,391 unique users in the month of September are a testament to its improvement.

That puts it in fourth place in the increasingly important battle for online readership, behind The Mail, The Guardian and The Telegraph.

Now, to see if Murdoch's next move will pay off - a plan to charge readers a fee for reading online news on News International websites.

The surprising result of a study by the Boston Consulting Group shows that apparently 48% of the public would be willing to pay.

But I remain sceptical that The Sun, or indeed The Times, is popular enough for that.

Surely, readers would just go elsewhere.

Good week, bad week

A MIXED week for the British press saw freedom of speech saved on the one hand and abused on the other.

I refer, of course, to the lifting of the ban on the Guardian's reporting of Parliament on Tuesday - and to a separate incident courtesy of Jan Moir's homophobic bile in her Daily Mail column.

While I was beaming at the ultimate victory of the Guardian in the first story, Ms Moir's comments left me shaking my head with bewilderment.

Firstly, the Guardian's victory was hugely important as the defence of a fundamental point of democracy - the right to report parliamentary proceedings openly.

This was enshrined by the Bill of Rights in 1689. It states: "Freedom of speech and debates or proceedings in Parliament ought not to be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of Parliament."

Yet, incredibly, Carter-Ruck, the lawyers for British oil-trading firm Trafigura, had been granted an injunction preventing the reporting of question tabled by an MP to a minister.

The injunction not only prevented the question being reported but also stopped the identification of the MP, which minister might answer it, or where the question could be found.

The Guardian could only report that Carter-Ruck were the lawyers involved and that they had been prevented from reporting in Parliament.

But their front page story provoked Twitter users and bloggers into action over what lay behind the mysterious ban.

Within hours, Twitter accounts began to display the details which the Guardian could not report, making a mockery of the injunction against the newspaper.

The question was from Paul Farrelly, the Labour MP for Newcastle-Under-Lyme. It concerned the reporting of an incident in which toxic waste was allegedly dumped by the company in Abidjan, the capital of Ivory Coast.

Eventually, the story was picked up on by the mainstream press, featuring on two prominent blogs and in the Spectator and Private Eye.

News of the gag caused outrage on all sides of the House of Commons with Speaker John Bercow describing it as "quite astonishing".

At lunchtime on Tuesday, Carter-Ruck withdrew its gagging attempt, shortly before a 2pm High Court hearing at which the Guardian intended to challenge it.

But, though it was the Guardian newspaper which benefited, this has been seen as an even greater victory for new media.

The users of Twitter were particularly influential on the result, finding out the details and spreading them like wildfire to cause enough noise to get the lawyers to back down.

Just days later, the Twitter users were at it again. But this time they were in opposition to the press or Jan Moir of the Daily Mail, to be precise.

Ms Moir was the target of their ire because of her spurious, unfounded comments about the nature of the death of pop star Stephen Gately in her Friday column, a day before he was even buried.

She suggested that Gately had lived "a life... shadowed by dark appetites or fractured by private vice" adding that his death "strike[s] another blow to the happy-ever-after myth of civil partnerships".

The story has attracted more than 500 comments, mainly critical, to its own website.

Twitter users posted outraged updates, some from the website's most famous exponents, Stephen Fry and Derren Brown, who are both gay.

On his feed, illusionist Brown urged the public to lodge a complaint with the Press Complaints Commission whose website crashed.

The PCC are unlikely to be able to do much about it. As stated on their website in the FAQs, they are unable to impose fines because they are a non-statutory body.

Even if they had that sanction, they do not "generally accept complaints from third parties about cases involving named individuals without the signed authorisation of the person concerned".

They also do not make decisions on matters of taste and decency, citing that this would restrict press freedom.

Mail editor Paul Dacre, who is current chair of the PCC Editors' Code of Practice Committee, would be showing great ignorance if he attempts to let this story blow over, however.

As shown by the Guardian this week, the freedom of the press is a constant, hard-fought battle and the Fourth Estate is vital to the running of democracy in this country.

But some of its members would do well to remember not to abuse their rights.

They should also recall that a journalist's first duty is to the truth and not their own agenda - and that includes columnists.