Meetings between journalists and politicians can be “a potential conspiracy against the public”, the Daily Telegraph political commentator has warned.Peter Oborne told the Leveson Inquiry today meetings between ministers and newspaper moguls can be even more dangerous.In a written statement, he said: “Meetings between journalists and politicians should be viewed as a potential conspiracy against the public, even more so meetings between ministers and proprietors.”Oborne said under New Labour, political reporting became a matter of private deals with the media, “invisible to voters”. He added it was a “great pity” the House of Commons no longer enforces a “system of social apartheid between reporters and politicians”.He said: “People who tried to report objectively and fairly were frozen out, were bullied, victimised, not given any access to information, and people who were part of the inner circle and developed social connections – very often – with the powerful political people, were favoured. And of course there’s a price for that because it was very hard to be an independent observer, keep your integrity in those circumstances."He later added: "Something's gone wrong with the way politics is reported. If you go to the House of Commons chamber, it is quite often empty. Brilliant speeches are made and unreported but some sort of furtive lunch may end up as a bitchy piece by a colleague."Oborne, a former columnist for the Spectator, went on to say the press and politicians became an “elite category which you could observe manufacturing a particular kind of acceptable public truth”.He called the failure of newspapers to report phone hacking “culpable” but said it was because titles did not want to embarrass each other.He added: “I think anybody who was to suggest that the reason why the rival newspaper groups were unwilling to report phone hacking at the News International titles because they themselves [had done it] I think would need to provide evidence, a) that those rival newspaper groups practiced phone hacking - I haven’t seen any – and b) that that was the motive even if they did. I think you have to be very careful about that motive.”He said there was a sense News International was “above the law” because of a lack of interest “at Cabinet level” in alleged criminality at the company. Ministers, including former Culture Secretary Tessa Jowell, were informed their phones had been hacked in 2006 but took no action, implying a “government protection", he said.He added: “There is some reason to believe that the Murdoch connection with government contributed to the general News International sense of impunity.”The journalist told Lord Justice Leveson politicians had created a “myth” around the importance of press coverage, and only a “pathetic” Prime Minister would sack a colleague over negative reporting. He said most resignations had “serious reasons” behind them. He was surprised the House of Commons did not take action against ministers who leaked announcements to the media, saying a great deal of George Osborne’s budget seemed to have been leaked to the press before it was announced.Asked about the industry, Oborne said the police had failed to enforce existing laws and “proper systems” within newspapers had collapsed.He added: “It seems to me there was a gross failure by the Met police to investigate clear evidence of criminal behaviour.”He advocated a system where newspapers have a standards committee – including the editor, managaing editor, legal head and “old hand” journalist – to vet and record any proposals by reporters to break the law in the public interest.