Speaking as one of the guests on The Agenda with Tom Bradby John Prescott was asked how seemly the late night press regulation deal was:
It wasn't unconventional or unseemly. You go for an agreement where there are real difficulties, perhaps it takes time to get that agreement. At Kyoto, where I was involved in the negotiations, it went through the nights and nights... How do you get consensus? How do you get to an agreement?
Cameron realised he couldn't win it in the Commons and that's the reality of it. We realised - I would say our negotiator, I wasn't involved in it - wanted to accept the Charter but with a statutory framework. Eventually all parties came together. They did not want to appear to be condemned by all those who had been affected.
The big question now is... are they going to observe it - the press? Are they going to play a part? What I find difficult to understand is in Ireland they do have a proposal and it has a statutory framework and every one of the British papers signed up to it. So what's different here?
David Cameron has insisted a cross-party agreement for a new system of press regulation protects the principle of the free press.
Labour says this is just the sort of legal under-pinning they were looking for but the Conservatives say that no such press law will exist.
Is there a chance tomorrow's Commons' votes on press regulation may not go ahead? Could there be agreement between the parties after all?