Leveson inquiry: Met 'wary' of press after phone hacking, says Hogan-Howe Leveson inquiry: Bernard Hogan-Howe has said the Met was 'unstable' in its dealings with the press when he arrived at the force The UK's most senior police officer arrived at Scotland Yard to find the Metropolitan police in an "unstable state" and "wary" about its relationship with the media following the phone-hacking scandal and two-high profile departures, the Leveson inquiry has heard. Bernard Hogan-Howe, who was appointed Met commissioner last September, said he found clear concerns over the force's handling of the phone-hacking affair as he began the job. "The whole team at the top was in quite a lot of flux," he said, adding that the departures of his predecessor, Sir Paul Stephenson, and assistant commissioner John Yates - the man who led the 2009 hacking review - had affected the organisation. Hogan-Howe also admitted he had been surprised by the extent of the some officers' relationships with the press. I was probably unsurprised by the fact that there was some contact and some of it was social - I think probably in many organisations it would have been something that people might have expected. But probably the frequency of it and the extent, I think that's the thing that's been a surprise," he told Lord Justice Leveson. As a result, he said, the Met had re-examined its dealings with the press and amended its behaviour accordingly. He acknowledged that there was now less socialising with members of the Crime Reporters' Association, but said he did not accept journalists' suggestions that the relationship between Scotland Yard and Fleet Street had become "more austere" or that "the flow of informal information" had dried up. He pointed to regular press briefings and the work officers did around court cases and with the local press. "What I don't want to encourage is leaks," he said. It's about trying to make sure that inappropriate relationships don't develop. That's what we're trying to stop. For too long, he said, the focus had been on human interest stories rather than stories that served the public interest. Although most journalists knew there was no point in pushing police so hard that it interfered with the criminal justice process, he said, there was inevitable tension between reporters and officers about how much information should be released. While he said a good "adult debate" over the flow of information was welcome and necessary, he said detectives should never identify suspects or brief about them unless there was a real possibility that such information would help the police catch them and stop them committing further crimes. Hogan-Howe said it was normal for police and journalists to meet and share a coffee or a meal, but warned that the presence of alcohol on such occasions raised questions. "The question is around their social interaction and if complicated by alcohol, it seems to me there is a risk that in fact their judgment is clouded and the relationship develops in a different way," he said. He said he would never argue for every leak to be investigated - "I think you can drive yourself barmy, if we did that" - but said serious information breaches had to be dealt with. The commissioner also said that people needed to remember that the police were fallible and had to balance their investigations with their relationships with the organisations - be they newspapers, local authorities, or the security services - that they found themselves compelled to investigate. "It's not an easy line to draw and we try hard to get that right," he said. I can't sit here and say its an easy line to draw ... We have to make our way through it quite carefully. Hogan-Howe concluded his evidence by saying he hoped the inquiry would help the police and the press find a mutually beneficial way to work together. "I want a good challenging relationship with the press," he said. But I do not want us to be left in a position where our integrity is perceived to be compromised.