Times crime editor denies paper hired Met's Andy Hayman as a 'favour' Leveson inquiry: Sean O'Neill said Andy Hayman had been the Times's second choice The Times's crime editor has told the Leveson inquiry that the paper did not make former Metropolitan police assistant commissioner Andy Hayman a columnist as a "favour." Questions have been raised about the paper's hiring of Hayman, who oversaw Scotland Yard's original 2006 investigation into phone hacking at fellow News International title the News of the World. However, Sean O'Neill, giving evidence to the Leveson inquiry on Wednesday, denied there was anything improper about this and revealed that he only approached Hayman after failing to persuade another senior Met officer, Peter Clarke, to write for the Times. He said he was "instrumental" in suggesting that his paper should take on Hayman, who he added was being pursued by the Daily Telegraph as a possible columnist at the time. Frankly now I wish I had let the Daily Telegraph sign him up. It would have been better for him and for us," O'Neill told Lord Justice Leveson. Appearing at the inquiry earlier in March, Hayman was asked by Leveson whether he thought writing a Times column "creates or runs the risk of creating a perception of a relationship which goes beyond that which is appropriate." Hayman replied that "with hindsight" he could see Leveson's point. It was revealed at the inquiry that Hayman was paid £10,000 a year for his column, which he said was arranged while he was on transition to retirement. Hayman wrote for the Times between September 2008 and May 2011. O'Neill also told the inquiry in Wednesday an official report criticising relations between Scotland Yard and the media reads like an "East German ministry of information manual." He said Elizabeth Filkin's recent review of the Metropolitan police's interactions with journalists has created a "climate of fear." "I found this document patronising and ultimately dangerous for future accountability of the police," O'Neill added. It has already created a climate of fear in which police officers - who may want to pass on information that is in the public but not the corporate interest - are afraid to talk to the press. Despite its repeated talk of openness and transparency, the key passages in the Filkin report refer to a clampdown on 'unauthorised contact' between police and the press. Filkin's recommendations, published in January, advised officers to avoid "flirting" and accepting alcohol from journalists. O'Neill quoted a passage from her report calling on the Met to "create an environment where the improper disclosure of information is condemned and deterred." He said this read "as if it comes from an East German ministry of information manual rather than guidance for public servants in 21st century Britain." O'Neill also expressed concerns about new restrictions on journalists and police officers sharing meals and drinks. "I do fear that the ability to build a trustworthy relationship with someone is going to be seriously inhibited if you cannot have a coffee or a pint or a bite to eat with them," he said. I do think that's a concern, and I think it's quite important for senior crime journalists to be able to meet senior police officers and talk openly and freely without necessarily a watchdog or press officer sitting on your shoulder recording every word or listening in on every word.