That statement
Here is that statement from Scotland Yard:
"The prime minister has been interviewed briefly to clarify points emerging from the ongoing investigation. He was interviewed as a witness, not as a suspect and co-operated fully.
We requested the meeting was kept confidential for operational reasons. We are not prepared to discuss further."
So we still don't know the reason for the police's request for confidentiality. Could it have been to avoid tipping off Lord Levy who the police questioned four days later? On the other hand, the interview with Levy was fixed with his agreement so this explanation would only hold if the police booked the appointment the day before they arrested him.
PS. What it does show is that for all the talk of leaks, both the police and the politicians kept this one firmly under their hat.
I'm 
Comments
Strange a couple of days ago Downing Street was up in arms,saying that the Police were leaking statements to the media.Now they are seen to be colluding with the Police by keeping the interview out of the Press.
Whatever the truth,something smells here.
Don't you feel so sorry for the poor note taker and subsequent interview transcriber?
In 45 minutes how many 'I mean' and 'Yr know's' could Blair have uttered. Yet alone failing to answer any question put to him?
The appointment for Lord Levy was fixed previously since we were told that it took place when he reported to the police as part of his bail. Therefore it would seem most likely that there was some connection with the Blair interview and the Levy arrest, especially with the deafening silence for No 10 in contrast to the howls of protest after the Turner arrest.
Given that it later would emerge - as it has done - that "secrecy had been requested" it should have been obvious to whoever decided on it that this would reflect very badly on Mr Blair in the media...
Strange how this interview has been made public after PMQs. We wouldn't want Mr Cameron to have all the fact would we now?!
To Nick Farmer: the phrase of the moment with the PM - and many of his colleagues are picking up on it - is not so much "I mean" or "Y'know" as "Look...". With that one simple monosyllable they say, "Your question is too difficult to answer, so I'm going to ignore it and instead to trot out this soundbite my advisers prepared earlier..."
Personally, I think Nick R and his journalistic colleagues should carry cattle prods or tasers, and give the politicians a quick zap every time they try to insult to our intelligence in this way!
If Gorbals Mick was interviewing him he could have answered any question he liked. I wonder if he started his answers to plod with "Since 1997....."
I wonder how many other news 'blackouts' are still in place after ten years of this media savvy Government?
"this media savvy Government".
Is that supposed to be an insult or a compliment?
Having searched through the Downing St press briefings for the last few months, it's true that every time he's asked whether Blair has been interviewed, PMOS replies "Nothing has changed". That's the phrase used consistently - "Nothing has changed". Unqualified.
But this week, PMOS keeps saying "As far as he is concerned, nothing has changed". And that's consistent too, "as far as he is concerned".
Now, if the PMOS didn't know, why did he suddenly start to qualify it in this way?
Now look at today's statement:
"the press and communications team in Downing Street were not informed. AS FAR AS THEY WERE CONCERNED, nothing had changed."
Now, I may be reading too much into this, but it looks to me as if they DID know, but they didn't officially know. Hence the change of formulation, to keep it sort of honest. They knew it wasn't true - but "as far as they were concerned" it was.
To Gary S. I've always thought that when they start a sentence "Look", they are really saying "You don't understand the whole issue, do you? You are just one of the electorate, how could you possibily know the full story? This is really boring me, having to explain it again." It smacks of arrogance.
If you knew the reason, it would NOT be confidential, would it.
The whole "Look..." thing has been annoying me for about 18 months now. I suspect Blair started it, the rest of Commomns quickly adopted it, and I fully expect Wayne Rooney to trot it out in post-match interviews ("Look, its simple, he was tripped etc...").
Can we start a debate on this please? Someone with sharper satircal skills this I should expose this annoyance, ensuring all future culprits are ridiculed as simple Blair-copying idiots.
By the way, I always thought it was short for "Look, what I'm about to say is really obvious; if you question what I'm about to say you must be stupid...".