I made a hurtful and thoughtless comment on Sunday when I said that "I wanted my life back." When I read that recently, I was appalled. I apologize, especially to the families of the 11 men who lost their lives in this tragic accident. Those words don't represent how I feel about this tragedy, and certainly don't represent the hearts of the people of BP -- many of whom live and work in the Gulf -- who are doing everything they can to make things right. My first priority is doing all we can to restore the lives of the people of the Gulf region and their families -- to restore their lives, not mine. ||||| Associated Press BP CEO Tony Hayward arrives on Capitol Hill June 17 to testify before the House Oversight and Investigations subcommittee hearing. 
 
 WASHINGTON—BP PLC Chief Executive Tony Hayward went to Capitol Hill to apologize for the disaster caused by his company's gushing Gulf of Mexico oil well, and to absorb the blows as American politics requires when business leaders stumble into tragedy or scandal. 
 
 BP Chief Executive Tony Hayward said he wasn't involved in key decisions with the Horizon oil well, frustrating lawmakers looking for more details. Neil King and Bob O'Brien discuss. Also, Paul Vigna discusses the limited options the Fed and Treasury have if the economy falls back into recession. 
 
 Mr. Hayward stuck to his plan. He sat for hours on Thursday, alone at a witness table, parrying questions from indignant members of the House Energy and Commerce Committee in a deliberate monotone. 
 
 Over and over, he said he wasn't involved in the decisions preceding the accident and declined to speculate on causes until investigations were complete. 
 
 Summoning executives of companies caught up in financial or legal trouble to receive televised scoldings is a ritual of U.S. politics. Detroit auto titans, Wall Street bankers, and the head of Japanese auto giant Toyota Motor Corp. have all done time in Congress's dock as lawmakers looked for someone to blame for the calamities of the past two years. 
 
 Even by the standards of these proceedings, the fury directed at Mr. Hayward was unusual. Democrats accused BP of sacrificing safety for profit. One said the video of the Gulf spill made her physically ill. A Louisiana Republican held up a photograph of an oil-slimed pelican. 
 
 And when one senior Republican—Rep. Joe Barton of Texas—stepped up to apologize to Mr. Hayward, the backlash was so severe he was forced to apologize for his apology. 
 
 Just minutes into the hearing, Mr. Barton, a ranking member of the committee, denounced the Obama Administration for pushing the British oil company to agree Tuesday to put $20 billion into a fund to cover damages caused by the disaster. Mr. Barton called the plan a "slush fund." 
 
 To that point, Mr. Barton's critique echoed statements by other Republicans. Then he went further. 
 
 "I apologize," Mr. Barton said. "I do not want to live in a country where any time a citizen or a corporation does something that is legitimately wrong is subject to some sort of political pressure that is—again, in my words—amounts to a shakedown. So, I apologize." 
 
 Rep. Barton left the hearing immediately after making his statement. The aftershocks rumbled throughout the day. 
 
 Mr. Hayward's entourage included a phalanx of dark suits including aides, experts and a body guard. He brought a public-relations specialist. 
 
 He soon found that $20 billion and an apology weren't going to make his day better. 
 
 "The explosion and fire aboard the Deepwater Horizon and the resulting oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico never should have happened—and I am deeply sorry that they did," Mr. Hayward said in an 11-page written statement. 
 
 Members of the House Energy and Commerce Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations were having none of it. They grew increasingly frustrated as Mr. Hayward dodged specific questions aimed at pinning blame for the explosion on specific BP decisions and on him as the company's leader. 
 
 View Slideshow Associated Press Protesters stand behind BP CEO Tony Hayward, as he arrives on Capitol Hill June 17, to testify before the House Oversight and Investigations subcommittee hearing. 
 
 Investors were relieved by BP's decision to suspend dividends, hoping it would ease pressure on the company over its handling of the Gulf of Mexico oil spill. Grainne McCarthy, David Weidner and Guy Chazan discuss. Also, David Wessel discusses America's system of home ownership, saying that although it has been celebrated for putting so many families into their own homes, it has become, as one economist put it, "a case study in failure." 
 
 "With respect, sir, we drill hundreds of wells each year," he said slowly, fingering a pen as he testified. 
 
 "That's what's scaring me," shot back Rep. Michael Burgess, a Texas Republican. 
 
 Energy and Commerce Committee chairman Henry Waxman (D., Calif.) accused Mr. Hayward of stonewalling. 
 
 Rep. Barton Calls Escrow Fund a 'Shakedown' 2:04 Rep. Joe Barton said that BP's meeting with the Obama administration resulting in the oil company setting aside $20 billion to cover Gulf of Mexico oil spill costs was a "shakedown." 
 
 "I'm not stonewalling," Mr. Hayward said. "I simply was not involved in the decision-making process" before the explosion. 
 
 The hearing ground on and on. As the clock crawled toward 5 p.m., Mr. Hayward's stated positions remained unchanged. 
 
 The same couldn't be said for Mr. Barton. The Texas lawmaker's apology to Mr. Hayward had touched off a storm. The White House, stung by earlier criticism from Republicans of its $20 billion deal with BP, unloaded with a rare mid-hearing rebuttal to Rep. Barton. 
 
 "What is shameful is that Joe Barton seems to have more concern for big corporations that caused this disaster than the fishermen, small-business owners and communities whose lives have been devastated by the destruction," a White House spokesman said. Vice President Joe Biden called Mr. Barton's views "incredibly insensitive." 
 
 Republican lawmakers rushed to disassociate themselves from Mr. Barton's comments. Rep. Jeff Miller, a conservative Republican whose district includes beaches on Florida's panhandle, called Mr. Barton's comments "reprehensible" and said he should step down as ranking member of the Energy and Commerce Committee. "Mr. Barton's remarks are out of touch with this tragedy," Mr. Miller said in a written release. 
 
 Rep. John Boehner of Ohio, the Republican leader in the House, distanced himself from Mr. Barton and his characterization of the fund's creation as political extortion and said BP ought to pay "every dime" of the damages. Later, Mr. Boehner and other top House Republicans issued a statement saying Mr. Barton's remarks "were wrong," and welcoming BP's "initial pledge of $20 billion" to pay for economic damages. 
 
 Mr. Barton was told by the Reps. Boehner and Eric Cantor—the top two House Republicans—"that he needed to apologize immediately, or he would lose his ranking-member seat immediately," a leadership aide said. 
 
 At about 3 p.m., Mr. Barton returned to the hearing room to revise and extend his earlier remarks. 
 
 "If anything I have said this morning has been misconstrued to the opposite effect, I want to apologize for that misconstrued misconstruction," he said. 
 
 Then he left the room. 
 
 —Siobhan Hughes and Laura Meckler contributed to this article. 
 
 Write to Michael M. Phillips at michael.phillips@wsj.com and Stephen Power at stephen.power@wsj.com ||||| Protesters stand behind BP's chief executive, Tony Hayward, as he arrives on Capitol Hill to testify before the House Oversight and Investigations sub-committee on the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. Photograph: Haraz Ghanbari/AP 
 
 10.45pm: So, after seven and a half hours, BP's chief executive is leaving Congress. It's been a very testy hearing with a lot of frustration from lawmakers. Tony Hayward's responses have fallen a long way short of informative - he's stuck rigidly to his line of refusing to comment on the precise cause of the Deepwater Horizon disaster until BP's internal investigation is over. But here's a brief summary of some of the key points from today's hearing: 
 
 
 
 - Hayward says he's "devastated" by the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster. But he insists he's seen no evidence of reckless behaviour by BP. He says: "There's nothing I've seen in the evidence so far that suggests that anyone put costs ahead of safety. If there are, then we'll take action." 
 
 - BP is stressing the failure of a blowout preventer, which was made by a US company, Cameron, as a central element in the disaster. Hayward said the device was supposed to be "failsafe" and that the industry needs to look at the design of such equipment urgently. 
 
 - A Texas Republican, Joe Barton, drew some attention away from Hayward by offering a bizarre apology to BP for the White House's "shakedown" in forcing the company to set up a $20bn "slush fund" for spill victims. After condemnation from both sides of the House, Barton apologised for apologising to BP. 
 
 - Hayward admits to being detached from operations on the doomed well - he told lawmakers that his only awareness of the operation of the Macondo well was when he was briefed that the company had struck oil in April. 
 
 - The BP boss stonewalled criticism of the design of the well, saying the methods used were common in the Gulf of Mexico. He denied any dispute on the Deepwater Horizon rig between BP staff and those of its contractor, Transocean. But he insisted on waiting for the results of an internal investigation before apportioning any blame. 
 
 - Overall, Hayward's appearance can hardly be called a success. The committee's chairman, Bart Stupak, admonished him for evasiveness that "increased the frustration" of the American people over the catastrophic spill. 
 
 10.30pm: Finally, we're drawing to an end. Chairman Bart Stupak says he can't allow things to go on until midnight. He thanks Hayward for coming voluntarily but adds that members are "frustrated" by the "evasiveness" of the BP boss's answers with too many answers of the ""I don't know" genre. 
 
 Bang, bang goes the gavel. Everybody gets up and Hayward is being guided out by a sizeable posse of security guards. 
 
 10.27pm: Diana DeGette, a Colorado Democrat, wants to know if BP is committed to reimbursing long-term healthcare costs accrued by Gulf residents because of the spill. Hayward says the company will do so if the independent adjudicator, Ken Feinberg, rules that it should. 
 
 "$20bn is a very large sum of money to pay claims," says Hayward. 
 
 DeGette isn't very satisfied. She wants to know whether, in Hayward's opinion, healthcare costs are reasonable. Hayward says he's not going to give an opinion - that's why BP has appointed an independent adjudicator. 
 
 10.17pm: Meanwhile, outside the committee room...Russian president Dmitry Medvedev has pondered, in an interview with the Wall Street Journal, whether the Gulf spill will lead to the "annihilation" of BP. He hopes not, saying Russia won't re-evaluate its dealings with BP, but says the disaster will lead to a re-thinking of oil exploration around the world. 
 
 This is a wake-up call," Mr. Medvedev told the WSJ. Of BP's fate, he added: "Certainly, we are not indifferent to their future. ... Hopefully, they can absorb the losses." 
 
 10.12pm: Welch, a Democrat from Vermont, says Hayward has answered "65 times" to reasonable questions today that he doesn't know the answer. Don't know if he's counted or guessing. Either way, Welch isn't impressed and says Hayward's appearance will only erode confidence in BP that had begun to build following Wednesday's agreement to set up a $20bn compensation fund. 
 
 10.10pm: Congressman Peter Welch: "Mr Hayward, can you point to any single bad decision that was made with respect to Deepwater Horizon?" 
 
 Hayward: "I'm not prepared to point today, after a half-complete investigation, to what was or was not a bad decision." 
 
 The BP boss says there were many components - including the casing, cementing, blow-out preventer - involved in the accident. All involved in the well agreed to continue drilling. 
 
 10.05pm: Bruce Braley, an Iowa Democrat, is asking about the bereaved families who lost workers on the Deepwater Horizon. What should widows tell their children about how their fathers died? 
 
 Hayward: "Based on what I know, this was a tragic accident involving many failure mechanisms. That is the reality. That is why this happened." 
 
 Braley asks if blame is shared by other companies involves. Hayward: "I don't believe now is the time to try and apportion blame. I believe now is the time to try and understand what happened." 
 
 The BP boss adds that he doesn't believe it's time for "finger-pointing". 
 
 9.55pm: Congressman Michael Burgess wants BP to open up a freephone 1-800 number for ideas on how to clean up the Gulf. 
 
 "We have a lot of ingenuity in America," he declares. Burgess says lots of clever people are watching television feed of the leaking underwater pipe: "It's driving people crazy to watch that thing bubbling in the Gulf." 
 
 9.52pm: Hayward admits the Macondo drilling operation was running behind schedule. He says operating the Deepwater Horizon well cost about a million dollars a day. But he adds that the "important thing" from an economic point of view was that BP had made an oil discovery in the area and that it wanted to secure the well. 
 
 9.50pm: Michael Burgess, a Republican from Texas, is asking about reports of an argument between Transocean engineers and BP's "company man", Donald Vidrine, on the rig. 
 
 Hayward denies that there was any such dispute: "It is my understanding that that account has been contradicted under oath at the marine board investigation and that there was no heated discussion or skirmish." 
 
 The BP boss says a Transocean tool pusher testified that there was never any row between staff from the two companies in the hours leading up to the disaster. 
 
 9.46pm: Committee chairman Bart Stupak is having a rather complicated (and possibly pedantic) argument with Hayward about whether the blowout preventer can be called a "failsafe mechanism" if it isn't failsafe. I'm not sure if this is going to get anywhere. 
 
 9.41pm: This morning's "apology" to BP by Joe Barton continues to create uproar - it's been condemned by the White House and by Republican leader John Boehner. Reuters has a story on it here. Barton has truly done BP a favour by stealing some of the heat away from Hayward. The White House press secretary Robert Gibbs just tweeted: "Who would the GOP put in charge of overseeing the energy industry & Big Oil if they won control of Congress? Yup, u guessed it - JOE BARTON" 
 
 9.33pm: Joe Barton asks Hayward to offer one or two suggestions of things that can be done to prevent a similar accident in the future. 
 
 "I believe the most important one is to take the failsafe mechanism that is the blowout preventer and design it so that it is genuinely failsafe," says Hayward, who says it's "clear" that the current design basis of blowout preventers in deepwater drilling is "not as failsafe as we'd believed it do be". 
 
 He says this is an "important lesson for the industry to grasp". 
 
 9.31pm: Hayward is asked when BP's internal investigation is likely to be completed. He declines to give even a rough timeframe, saying: "One of the most important elements of this is the blowout preventer. it remains on the seabed and it needs to be examined." 
 
 BP has repeatedly stressed the crucial role of the failed blowout preventer in today's hearing. This piece of kit, made by the US firm Cameron, seems to be at the centre of any effort by BP to get other firms to shoulder a portion of the blame for the Gulf disaster. 
 
 9.26pm: Henry Waxman's moving in for the kill. He finds it shocking that when the potential consequences of a mistake on a rig are so enormous, Hayward seems so "removed" from the operations on the Deepwater Horizon platform. Where were the best minds in BP paying attention: "You were oblivious and so were other BP officials. I think this was a fundamental mistake in management." 
 
 Hayward says the focus of top executives was safety. What his team can do is ensure the right people are in places, the right processes are in place, that proper equipment and safeguards are in place: "I believe the right people were making decisions." 
 
 9.24pm: Everybody's had a turn to ask questions now. A few members have quick "follow-ups". So we're nearing the end. Hayward looks doleful, like a dog that's been repeatedly kicked. Deservingly or otherwise. 
 
 9.22pm: Hayward says the "integrity rating" of the failed Halliburton blowout preventer in the oil well was "of the order of ten to the minus five, ten to the minus six". He says: "That is to say, it was designed to fail between one in a hundred thousand and one in a million times." 
 
 Castor expresses surprise that this is considered an "acceptable risk". 
 
 9.18pm: Karhy Castor, a Democrat from Florida, wants to start out by expressing the "anger and frustration" of all the mom and pop businesses of her state at this "sucker punch", which she reckons is a consequence of BP placing "profit over safety". No jumping to conclusions there, then. 
 
 9.15pm: The New York Times points out that a satirical website has sprung up, www.joebartonwouldliketoapologize.com, to celebrate Republican congressman Joe Barton's apology to BP for the White House's "shakedown" - and for his subsequent apology for his apology. The site notes that Barton would also like to apologise to Osama bin Laden, Kanye West and to the England football team for depriving them victory last week. 
 
 9.11pm: A cheap shot? Congressman Jay Inslee says BP's investment on "safer offshore drilling technology" is about $10m annually - about 0.0033% of BP's revenue: "That doesn't sound like an adequate prioritisation. How does it compare to your compensation?" 
 
 Hayward isn't taking this lying down: "In what respect?" 
 
 He adds that his comp was $6m. 
 
 8.57pm: Hayward is asked if he thinks Obama's six-month moratorium on offshore drilling is reasonable 
 
 He replies: "I believe it is prudent for the industry to take stock of what has happened here before it moves forward." 
 
 Congressman Charles Gonzalez wants to know when it would be appropriate to lift the moratorium. Hayward vaguely says it should be lifted when everybody understands the causes of the spill. 
 
 8.49pm: Scalise is frustrated: "If it's not you that's blocking it, you need to go tell somebody that it's being blocked. Because it's being blocked." He says Louisiana does not have the luxury of time on sand barriers or on things like salvage of seafood. 
 
 Hayward: "I understand your concern and your anger." 
 
 8.47pm: A Louisiana Republican, Steve Scalise, has a prop - he holds up a picture of an oiled pelican. He wants to know why it's taking so long to enact Bobby Jindal's plan for sand barriers protecting the Louisiana coast. 
 
 Hayward blames the federal government, saying "ultimate approval" lies with the administration. 
 
 8.44pm: Eliot Engel, a New York Democrat, wants to know how the US can be certain that what happened at the Macondo well won't happen at BP's hundreds of other wells in the Gulf of Mexico. 
 
 "The other wells have all been completed and are secure," says Hayward. 
 
 Engel asks if that's the same type of assurance that Hayward gave when he promised a "laser-like" focus on safety. Much heat, no light. Engel hits out: "I, like everyone else here and everyone else in America, am thoroughly disgusted. I think you're stalling, I think you're insulting our intelligence and I really resent it." 
 
 8.39pm: Stearns wants to know if Hayward was briefed about Halliburton warning of gas surges in the Macondo well. Hayward says he wasn't informed of this. 
 
 "I had no prior knowledge of this well prior to the incident whatsoever," says the BP boss. 
 
 Stearns wonders if Hayward would have been fired if he was the captain of a ship that crashed into New Orleans, killing 11 people and spilling lots of oil. Has anybody at BP been fired as a result of this incident? Hayward: "Not so far." 
 
 8.36pm: A comedian. Cliff Stearns, a Republican from Florida, says Hayward doesn't seem to be able to answer many questions - so he has an easy one: "Is today Thursday?" 
 
 Hayward (unamused): "It is Thursday." 
 
 Getting serious, Stearns asks if the oil spilt on the coast of the Gulf of Mexico is a consequence of BP's reckless behaviour. 
 
 "It is a consequence of a big accident." 
 
 Stearns: "Yes or no - reckless behaviour or not?" 
 
 Hayward: "There is no evidence of reckless behaviour." 
 
 Stearns: "You're saying BP has had no reckless behaviour?" 
 
 Hayward: "I have seen no evidence of reckless behaviour." 
 
 8.33pm: Welch asks about resignation. He wants to know if Hayward still enjoys the confidence necessary to act as chief exec, given the loss of $100bn in shareholder value, the suspension of BP's dividend and the damage caused to the Gulf. 
 
 Hayward replies: "I'm focused on the response. I'm focused on trying to eliminate the leak, trying to contain the oil on the surface, defending the beaches, clean up the spill and restore the lives of people on the Gulf Coast. That's what I intend to do." 
 
 8.30pm: BP's boss goes a little further in defending decisions on the Deepwater Horizon. Asked about the small number of centralisers keeping the drilling pipe in place, Hayward says "more doesn't always mean better". And asked by congressman Peter Welch about the use of saltwater, rather than heavier drilling fluid, to flush out the well, Hayward says: "The procedure that was used to displace mud was a procedure not uncommon in the industry. it was a procedure approved by the Mineral Management Service." 
 
 8.27pm: Good stuff from Peter Welch, a Democrat, who lists, one by one, all of BP's past accidents in the US. Is it true that BP's Texas City refinery blew up in 2005, killing 15 people? Is it true that BP's pipelines leaked in Alaska the following year? Is it true that BP was fined $370m by the US department of justice? 
 
 "That is correct," Hayward glumly replies to each one. 
 
 8.24pm: Hayward is accused of a "real detachment, a real disconnect" by Betty Sutton, a Democrat. She says: "When push came to shove on the Deepwater Horizon, the company's concern appeared to be the bottom line." 
 
 She wants to know who was responsible for decisions on the rig: "Mr Hayward, as the leader of the company, don't you have to take responsibility?" 
 
 Hayward: "I am absolutely responsible for the safety and reliable operations of BP. That is what I have said all along." 
 
 8.20pm: Texas Republican Joe Barton asks: "Based on what you now know, do you agree that this accident was preventable?" 
 
 Hayward: "I believe that all accidents are preventable, absolutely." 
 
 Then, bizarrely, Barton apologises for his earlier apology to BP. Barton, something of a conservative maverick, said at the beginning of the hearing that the oil company was the victim of a White House "shakedown" and had been obliged by the Obama administration to set up a $20bn "slush fund" for compensation. Barton now says he believes BP was responsible and should be brought to account for the accident - and that he apologises if anything he said earlier had been "misconstrued". 
 
 8.12pm: Christensen notes that Hayward has described BP as "a responsible party" for the accident, not "the responsible party". Does he think there are others? 
 
 Hayward: "The government has named four responsible parties - BP, Transocean, Mitsui and Anadarko." 
 
 Mitsui and Anadarko were minority shareholders in the well, where BP had a 65% stake. Transocean owned and managed the rig that was leased for the operation. 
 
 8.09pm: A piece of masterly understatement. Donna Christensen, a delegate from the US Virgin Islands, asks Hayward if he surprised somebody didn't take a decision to shut down the Deepwater Horizon drilling platform earlier. 
 
 "I think in the light of what we now know, it is perhaps surprising that someone didn't say that they were concerned," replies the BP boss. 
 
 8.05pm: Hayward is asked if BP shouldn't have had "failsafe mechanisms" in case of a massive oil leak. He says Halliburton's faulty blowout preventer, which was supposed to cut off oil in the event of the accident, was intended to fill this role. 
 
 "We believed that the blow-out preventer was the ultimate failsafe mechanism. That clearly wasn't the case in this instance." 
 
 Hayward says blowout preventer failed three times - when it was activated from the drilling rig, when the drilling rig separated from the blowout preventer and when undersea robots tried to activate it a day later. That's another clear signal by BP that it feels contractors share the blame for the accident. 
 
 7.59pm: Did BP force Deepwater Horizon rig workers to sign legal disclaimers before allowing them to go home after the explosion on the platform? 
 
 Hayward says his company wasn't responsible, appears to blame Transocean: "I think it's inappropriate and it was nothing to do with BP" 
 
 7.57pm: Jan Shakowsky, a Democrat, notes that Hayward says he was "personally devastated" by the Deepwater Horizon disaster: "Probably not as devastated as the widows that testified for our committee." Ouch. 
 
 She quotes one of the widows, Natalie Roshto, who says two BP execs came to her husband's memorial service and "never extended a hand, a hug, never extended a word of sorrow". Were only interested in where they were sitting. 
 
 "I'm devastated by the accident, absolutely devastated," says Hayward. "I feel great sorry for the people who werte impacted by it. But the people who were killed by the accident were not employees of BP, they were employees of Transocean and other contractors." 
 
 Hayward says Transocean and the other companies involved made it clear to BP that they wanted to deal with the families themselves. 
 
 7.51pm: Hayward says he'd be "very surprised" if his chief operating officer, Doug Suttles, or head of exploration and production, Andy Inglis, were involved in decisions about the design of the leaking Macondo oil well. 
 
 The BP boss is playing a dangerous game by declaiming all responsibility for what went on at the rig. He's not exactly inspiring confidence in his senior leadership team. 
 
 Mike Doyle, a Pennsylvania Democrat, reminds Hayward that he's not running a department store, he's running an oil company with "life or death" decisions. Doyle wonders if running an oil company might be a good career option - it pays better than being a Congressman and doesn't seem to involve much work: "Those of you at the top don't seem to have a clue what was going on at this rig." 
 
 7.46pm: Diana DeGette, a Democrat, draws a bit of blood by highlighting an email in which a BP engineer responded to concerns about the design of the Macondo well by glibly remarking: "Who cares, it's done, end of story, it will probably be fine." 
 
 Hayward says: "I think that email is a cause for concern. I'd like to understand the context it was sent. As I've said before, if there's any action that people put cost ahead of safety, we will take action." 
 
 The BP boss denies being told by lawyers to evade answering Congressional questions. 
 
 7.41pm: Did anybody inform Hayward about a now notorious internal BP memo back in April describing the Deepwater Horizon drilling operation as a "nightmare well"? 
 
 "They did not," says Hayward, who says the first he knew of it being a "nightmare well" was when investigators from the Congressional committee drew the memo to his attention. 
 
 7.37pm: Does Hayward think BP was "shaken down" by the White House to set up its $20bn compensation fund, an Iowa Democrat, Bruce Braley, wants to know. 
 
 Hayward doesn't exactly say no, but neither does he say yes. He says of the meeting at the White House: "We came together to figure out a way of working together to figure out a way to resolve a very, very serious situation." 
 
 So, Braley asks, is the $20bn pot of money a "slush fund" as Republican Joe Barton has controversially described it? 
 
 Hayward says the fund is "a signal of our commitment to do right", to make sure that fishermen, charter boat captains, property owners are made whole. He adds: "I certainly didn't think it was a slush fund, congressman." 
 
 7.31pm: Strongest semi-rebuttal from Hayward so far: "There's nothing I've seen in the evidence so far that suggests that anyone put costs ahead of safety. If there are, then we'll take action." 
 
 Phil Gingrey, a Republican from Georgia, wonders whether, if Hayward was physically present on the rig, he would have made the same decisions concerning the design and the casing of the well. 
 
 Hayward: "I'm not a drilling engineer so I'm not actually qualified to make those judgements. better people than I were involved in those decisions in terms of the judgements that were taken." 
 
 Gingrey: "With all due respect, Mr Hayward, I think you're copping out. You were the captain of the ship." 
 
 Frustrated, the congressman adds that the buck stops on Hayward's desk: "It seems like your testimony has been way too evasive." 
 
 7.28pm: A Democrat, Ed Markey, is tackling Hayward on the contentious issue of underwater plumes of oil. To date, BP has been sceptical about the presence of "plumes", insisting that the spilt oil is largely on the ocean surface. Markey cites BP's own water sampling and asks: "Are you now, once and for all, prepared to conceded that there are subsurface plumes?" 
 
 "There's oil in very low concentrations, 0.5 parts per million, distributed throughout the column," says Hayward. "Some of it is related to this spill, other parts are related to other oil in the water." 
 
 Markey asks if he's therefore saying that he doesn't recognise the term "plume". 
 
 Hayward: "I'm not an oceanographic scientist. What we know is..." 
 
 Markey interrupts: "I'm going to take that as a continuing 'no' from you and your testimony continues to be at odds with all known scientists." 
 
 7.19pm: under questioning from Republican congresswoman Marsha Blackburn, Hayward says BP has sought help from all over the place - both our "immediate peers and competitors in the Gulf of Mexico and globally from around the world and across America". Several hundred organisations are involved - the Brazilian energy firm Petrobras, academic institutions, many of the "greatest minds in this country". 
 
 7.16pm: We're off again! And Hayward has just been sternly ticked off by chairman Bart Stupak for his evasive answers. Stupak says Hayward was briefed on the topics he'd be facing and ought to be able to offer much more informative responses. 
 
 6.07pm: Key points from the first chunk of questioning: 
 
 
 
 • Tony Hayward says there are seven areas under investigation in a probe into the cause of the Deepwater Horizon disaster: cementing, the casing of the well, pressure measurements, well-control procedures and three issues surrounding a failed blowout preventer. 
 
 • As for decisions taken in the run-up to the accident, Hayward refuses to draw judgement until investigations are complete. He repeatedly declines to answer questions about alleged cost-cutting decisions with the refrain: "I can't answer that question because I wasn't there." 
 
 • Congressmen are getting irritated and frustrated with Hayward, who was accused by Henry Waxman of "kicking the can down the road" and acting as if he has nothing to do with the company. 
 
 • The BP boss says the only knowledge he had of the Macondo well was in mid-April, when he was informed by the head of the company's exploration division that BP had made an oil discovery. He had no other "prior involvement" until the disaster. 
 
 
 
 5.58pm: Another break. The committee is adjourned for an hour for a further six congressional votes. Bart Stupak tells us they're the last votes of the day and that when they're done, we'll be able to complete the grilling of Hayward without further interruption. Bang, bang, gavel, gavel. 
 
 5.55pm: What about a decision not to fully circulate mud in the well – was that to save money and time? 
 
 "I can't answer that question because I wasn't there." 
 
 How much money and time was saved by not circulating the mud? 
 
 "I'm afraid I can't recall." 
 
 Hayward offers the same response to every question: he wasn't party to individual decisions. He doesn't know how much money each alleged corner-cutting saved. 
 
 5.53pm: Michigan congressman John Dingell is interested in the decision to use single casing for the well, not a "tie-back" method. Was this decision to save money: yes or no? 
 
 Hayward says he wasn't involved in the decision and "can't possibly know" the precise reasoning behind it. 
 
 What about the decision to use only six centralisers to keep the bore in the middle of the well, not the 21 recommended by Halliburton? 
 
 Hayward: "I was not involved in that decision so it's impossible for me to answer that question." 
 
 5.49pm: This is shaping up to be extremely testy. Hayward is rigorously sticking to his line that he isn't going to make judgments on what happened on the Deepwater Horizon platform until investigations are complete. 
 
 John Sullivan, a Republican from Oklahoma, suggests that the accident wouldn't have happened if Exxon or Chevron were operating the rig. Don't they have more rigorous procedures? 
 
 "I don't think we can make that judgment," says Hayward flatly. 
 
 5.44pm: Waxman says it appears to him that BP knowingly risked well failure to save a few million dollars. Doesn't Hayward feel any sense of responsibility for these decisions? 
 
 Hayward: "I feel a great sense of responsibility for the accident." 
 
 Waxman: "How about for the decisions that made the accident more likely?" 
 
 The BP chief executive replies that we still need to determine what were the critical decisions. Says he can't "pass judgment" on these decisions at this stage. He says: "I'm not prepared to draw conclusions about this accident until such time as the investigation is concluded." 
 
 Waxman is annoyed. He says this is an "investigative committee". Accuses Hayward of "stonewalling" and of refusing to co-operate: "I'm just amazed at this testimony. Mr Hayward, you're not taking responsibility. You're kicking the can down the road and acting as if you have nothing to do with this company." 
 
 5.41pm: Hayward is asked about allegedly risky decisions concerning the cementing design of the well, and whether BP ignored warnings. He replies: "I wasn't involved in any of the decision-making. It's clear that there was some discussion among the engineering team and an engineering decision was taken." 
 
 Waxman says it's "clear that you don't want to answer our questions" and asks whether Hayward hasn't been involved in engineering throughout his career. Citing an internal document, he accuses BP of using a more dangerous well design called a "long string" to save $7m. 
 
 The BP boss isn't having it. Says the document also says the "long string" design would best serve the long-term integrity of the well and that the "long string" design isn't unusual in the Gulf of Mexico. So far, Hayward is being surprisingly feisty. 
 
 5.36pm: Now it's Henry Waxman's turn. He's not taking any nonsense. Wants to know "yes or no" whether Hayward has kept his commitment at the time of his appointment to focus "like a laser" on safety. 
 
 Hayward says he's made a lot of progress and starts saying he's "distraught" by the Gulf spill. Waxman snaps: "I don't want to know whether you're distraught. I want to know whether you've kept your commitment." 
 
 5.33pm: Hayward: "With respect, sir, we drill hundreds of wells around the world." 
 
 Congressman Burgess: "I know, that's what's scaring me." 
 
 5.32pm: Under questioning by Texan congressman Michael Burgess, Hayward defends the design of the Macondo well, saying there are "many wells" in the Gulf of Mexico with "the same casing design and the same cementing procedures". First sign that he isn't going to take this lying down. 
 
 He's not willing to be pressed further on the cementing: "I'm not prepared to speculate on what may or may not have made a difference until such time as the multiple investigations are concluded." 
 
 Asked how much he knew of what was happening on the Deepwater Horizon rig, he continues: "The only knowledge I had of the Macondo well was in mid-April when I was notified that we had made a discovery. That was my only prior involvement in the well." 
 
 5.29pm: The BP boss tells the committee that his oversight of safety in the company is through a "group operating risk committee", which meets on a bimonthly basis and which reviews safety throughout the global organisation. He says this arrangement is mirrored lower down the business. 
 
 5.27pm: Hayward is asked if he expects to be BP chief executive for much longer. 
 
 He replies that he's focused on carrying out his responsibilities – BP's "highest priority" is to stop the leak and clean up the oil on the surface of the Gulf of Mexico. 
 
 5.26pm: Stupak asks whether should there be a ban on companies operating in the US if they have "miserable" safety and environmental records. He cites BP's Texas City refinery disaster and the Gulf spill. 
 
 Hayward doesn't answer directly, just says he's devastated by the accident and that he's focused on "safe, reliable operations". Says he's made progress in changing BP's culture but that there's more work to do. 
 
 5.24pm: Stupak: every one of those seven areas dealt with saving money and saving time. Shouldn't leadership at BP be held accountable? 
 
 In reply, Hayward keeps repeating vaguely that since he became chief executive, he has focused on "safe, reliable operations" and that investigations are ongoing. 
 
 5.22pm: Stupak wants to know if BP managed the risk on the well properly, whether BP cut corners and why rival oil companies said they would have done things differently. 
 
 Hayward: We've launched an investigation which has identified seven areas – cement, casing, integrity pressure measurements, well-control procedures and three areas around the failed blowout preventer. That investigation is ongoing. 
 
 5.18pm: Stupak bangs his gavel and we're back moving. 
 
 5.12pm: Hayward's back in the room and congressmen are beginning to trickle back to their seats, so we'll be up and running again soon. 
 
 So a round-up of the main points so far: 
 
 
 
 • BP's chief executive, Tony Hayward, told Congress he was "personally devastated" by the Deepwater Horizon disaster. 
 
 • Proceedings were disrupted by a protester smeared with an oil-like substance who yelled that Hayward should "go to hell" and should be "tarred with a brush". 
 
 • A Democratic congressman, Peter Welch, called on Hayward to resign. 
 
 • Energy committee chairman Henry Waxman said that in 30,000 documents and emails, there was no sign that BP's top brass paid "the slightest attention" to clear safety problems at the Macondo well. 
 
 • But a maverick Republican, Joe Barton, broke ranks to declare BP was the victim of a "shakedown" by the White House. He claimed the company had been forced to set up a $20bn "slush fund" to clean up the Gulf and compensate victims. 
 
 
 
 4.34pm: Hayward says it's simply too early to say what caused the "incident". There are multiple investigations going on. BP will emerge "stronger, smarter and safer". 
 
 Still no questions! Bart Stupak is adjourning the hearing until 12 noon (5pm UK time) so members can go and vote. So after two hours, nothing of substance has been extracted from BP's boss. 
 
 4.31pm: My colleague Suzanne Goldenberg, who is in the room, tweets that the protester had a black oil-like substance on her hands and appeared to be hurt as she was wrestled to the ground by cops. She was screaming: "You need to be charged with a crime. You need to go to jail." 
 
 4.29pm: The protester has been thrown out, amid quite a furore. Scores of photographers descended on her and she didn't go quietly. The chairman, Bart Stupak, bangs his gavel, says he knows that emotions are running high but that the hearing will be conducted with "proper decorum". 
 
 Tony Hayward begins to read his pre-prepared statement, which can be found here. He emphasises that he was "personally devastated" by the death of 11 men on the Deepwater Horizon rig. 
 
 4.26pm: A furious interruption. A woman dressed in green has stood up and is yelling that Hayward needs to be "tarred with a brush" and should "go to hell". She is shouting very loudly and is being bundled to the ground by Congressional police. It takes about half a dozen officers to subdue her and drag her out of the room. 
 
 4.25pm: Opening statements are finally over. Now Hayward is being sworn in. He stands, raises his right hand and swears to tell the truth. 
 
 The BP boss is asked if he wants to be represented by a lawyer. He says: "I do not." 
 
 4.22pm: Betty Sutton, a Democrat from Ohio, informs us that she feels "physically sick" when she sees pictures of oil gushing into the Gulf. 
 
 Before any quizzing of Hayward, she's already decided that the disaster is a result of BP's recklessness and "come what may, cross that bridge when it comes to it" attitude, which is "outrageous and unacceptable". 
 
 4.19pm: First demand of the day for Hayward to resign. Peter Welch, a Democrat from Vermont, says the Gulf accident is "not an aberration" for BP, it's business as usual: "It's deja vu again and again and again." 
 
 Welch wants to know whether a CEO of a company that's incurred $370m in environmental fines and who's presided over the destruction of $100bn of shareholder value and the suspension of a dividend can still command confidence. 
 
 He asks: "Is it time, frankly, for that CEO, to consider submitting his resignation?" 
 
 Not wishing to nitpick but the $370m in fines imposed by the US department of justice in October 2007 were for the Texas City disaster and Alaska oil spill, which happened under Hayward's predecessor, John Browne. 
 
 4.14pm: Hayward looks tired and bored. He's slumped forward with his arms on the table in front of him and he keeps blinking extraordinarily slowly. 
 
 4.13pm: A voice from the Caribbean. Donna Christensen, delegate from the US Virgin Islands, says BP aren't the only ones at fault – the company couldn't have cut corners on safety "without the complicity of government agencies and regulators". But she can't ignore the fact that if different decisions had been made by BP, the 11 men who died on the Deepwater Horizon rig might still be alive. 
 
 I like her Caribbean accent. 
 
 4.03pm: An hour on the clock and Hayward still hasn't been allowed to utter a word. We're still on windy opening statements – members of Congress essentially addressing their constituents on television. Not much seeking-after-truth going on yet. 
 
 4.01pm: Parker Griffith, an avuncular-looking Republican from Alabama, offers a quirky bit of philosophy to try to put the oil spill in perspective. 
 
 "You're never as good as they say you are or as bad as they say you are, so this hearing will go back and forth," he tells Hayward. 
 
 Then Griffith goes off on a rather eccentric tangent, declaring: "The greatest environmental disaster in America is cigarettes. 60,000 Americans this year will die from cigarette-related diseases so if we're talking about the environment, let's not leave that out." 
 
 He adds: "This is not going to be the worst thing that ever happens to America." 
 
 Hmm. 
 
 3.55pm: It's quibbling, really, at this point but several bloggers have pointed out that some of the committee members persist in referring to BP as "British Petroleum" – a name that was dropped after BP merged with the American firm Amoco in 1998. John Sullivan, an Oklahoma Republican, seemed to delight in rolling "British Petroleum" over his tongue. No doubt he picked up the habit from the White House's spokesman, Robert Gibbs. 
 
 3.50pm: The committee is playing a video of testimony from the widows of two of the 11 men who died on the Deepwater Horizon platform calling for BP's top brass to be held accountable for their actions. 
 
 One of them talks of how her family was destroyed: "My family can never, and will never, be adequately compensated for our loss." 
 
 3.45pm: For the record, Hayward was paid £4.01m in salary, bonus and share awards last year, up from £2.85m in 2008. 
 
 3.44pm: First mention of Tony Hayward's pay package. John Dingell, a Michigan Democrat, thinks it's too high. 
 
 "Last year, Mr Hayward enjoyed a splendid 41% pay raise even as BP's profits dropped 45%. I just happen to be a poor Polish lawyer from Detroit but it seems to me this is a curious response to a drop in profits. It makes me wonder what the compensation package of our witness will be this year." 
 
 3.40pm: A bit of grandstanding from congressman John Sullivan, a Republican from the oil state of Oklahoma. He reckons the government is using the disaster to put oil companies "out of business" as part of a dangerous leftie agenda motivated by global warming. 
 
 "The administration is exploiting this disaster to advance its disastrous cap and trade energy policy," says Sullivan, who says carbon trading will "cripple the economy" and make unemployment lines longer. Hayward remains diplomatically expressionless. 
 
 3.37pm: Many of the committee members' chairs are still empty. Seems not everybody turns up to listen to opening statements from each lawmaker. Hayward is sitting at a table alone, facing the lawmakers. He looks a tad lonely. 
 
 3.33pm: Ed Markey, chairman of the panel's climate change subcommittee, takes issue with Joe Barton for describing BP's $20bn clean-up fund as a "slush fund". 
 
 "It was the government of the United States working to protect the most vulnerable citizens that we have in our country right now - the residents of the Gulf. It is BP's spill but it is America's ocean and it is American citizens who are being harmed." 
 
 Markey says victims of the Exxon Valdez spill in Alaska had to wait "years" for compensation, while certain claims from the 1984 Bhopal disaster in India were only settled this week. Markey says people can't wait for things to drag through the courts. 
 
 3.26pm: Stupak is picking off some of BP's less admirable public statements – including Hayward's often quoted remark that he wanted the spill halted so he could have his life back. 
 
 "We are not small people but we wish to get our lives back," says the Michigan Democrat. "For the Americans who live and work on the Gulf coast, it may be years before they get their lives back." 
 
 He adds: "Mr Hayward, I'm sure you'll get your life back and with a golden parachute back to England. But we in America are left with the terrible consequences of BP's reckless disregard for safety." 
 
 3.22pm: A Guardian article is being displayed by the committee's chairman, Bart Stupak! The Democrat is interested in a town hall hearing held by Hayward in Houston shortly after he became chief executive in 2007 at which he ordered a streamlining of management to speed up decisions. The Guardian piece, which is here, was subheaded "oil company has become too cautious" and Stupak is worried about BP's corporate culture. 
 
 3.15pm: Suddenly a change of tone. BP has a sympathiser in Joe Barton, a Republican from Texas. He says there's a system "built on British traditions" in the US that when people or corporations do bad things, they're held responsible. 
 
 However, Barton says he's "ashamed" of what happened in the White House yesterday: "I think it's a tragedy of the first proportion that a private corporation can be subjected to what I would call a shakedown, in this case a $20bn shakedown." 
 
 Barton describes BP's government mandated clean-up fund as a "slush fund" created at the behest of the US attorney general. There's no question BP made mistakes, says Barton, but there's a "due process" system that ought to be followed. 
 
 Stressing that he's speaking personally, rather than for the Republican party, Barton offers a rather remarkable apology to BP: "I apologise. I do not want to live in a country where every time a corporation does something wrong, it's subject to a political process that amounts to a shakedown." 
 
 3.10pm: Waxman continues: "BP's corporate complacency is astonishing." 
 
 One of BP's contractors, Halliburton, warned of gas flow problems, an engineer on the project dubbed it a "nightmare well". Waxman says there's a "complete contradiction between BP's words and deeds". He says "BP cut corner after corner to save a million dollars here, a few hours or days there, and now the whole Gulf of Mexico is paying the price." 
 
 Tousle-haired Hayward is looking grim. The smile has disappeared. 
 
 3.08pm: Henry Waxman, the moustachioed, bespectacled Californian renowned for taking no prisoners, is giving the first opening statement. He starts by commending BP for setting up its $20bn clean-up fund. 
 
 He says that when Hayward became CEO of BP, he promised to focus "like a laser" on safety. But complains that in 30,000 documents, there's no sign that Hayward looked closely at risks on the Deepwater Horizon well: "There's not a single email or document that shows you paid the slightest attention to the dangers at this well." 
 
 3.03pm: Stupak is banging his gavel and asking photographers to clear off so looks like we're ready for the off. 
 
 3.03pm: Hayward's in the room now, making his way to his seat with the ever-present slight smile that seems to infuriate BP's critics. He's being mobbed by photographers. A few protestors are in the room, holding up pink signs with slogans such as "BP kills". 
 
 The session is scheduled to run for five hours so we're potentially in for a bit of a marathon. The hearing is being chaired by Bart Stupak, a Democrat from Michigan, who heads the energy panel's subcommittee on oversight and investigations. 
 
 2.57pm: There's no shortage of advice out there for BP. In the Wall Street Journal, Daniel Henninger muses that the company is looking a little "beaten up" by the Obama administration. He says he can't recall a previous president with "this depth of visceral, antibusiness animosity". 
 
 A New York Times editorial says BP is "beginning to ante up" and that its $20bn fund is a step in the right direction. 
 
 And in Reuters' Breaking Views column, Neil Collins suggests there's only one man up to the job of chairing BP and winning over angry Americans - the former prime minister Tony Blair. 
 
 2.51pm: The action kicks off shortly. Henry Waxman and his colleagues will gavel us in at 10am (3pm UK time). Anybody keen to watch the hearing can do so here on CSPAN's website. 
 
 2pm: It's showdown time for BP's chief executive, Tony Hayward, who faces a public grilling today from 35 members of the House energy and commerce committee. It's set to be an extremely tough session for the BP boss, who has variously been dubbed "toxic Tony" and "wayward Hayward" for his occasionally tone-deaf public statements in response to the company's catastrophic oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. 
 
 Lawmakers are understandably disgusted by the environmental damage wreaked since BP's Deepwater Horizon oil rig exploded and sank on April 20. With Congressional elections just five months away, politicians aren't likely to extend much sympathy to BP, despite the company's commitment on Wednesday to set up a $20bn fund for the clean-up and compensation costs. 
 
 Hayward's written evidence, which you can read here, seems to strike a suitable contrite note. Hayward says he was "personally devastated" by the oil rig's explosion, which claimed 11 lives. He adds: "I fully grasp the terrible reality of the situation."
– British Petroleum CEO Tony Hayward has been roundly bashed for his unfortunate "I'd like my life back" comment—lots of fishermen and coastal residents want their lives back, too, not to mention relatives of the 11 men killed in the initial explosion. Today, Hayward apologized, reports the Huffington Post. "I made a hurtful and thoughtless comment," he said. "When I read that recently, I was appalled. I apologize, especially to the families of the 11 men who lost their lives in this tragic accident." His statement continues: "Those words don't represent how I feel about this tragedy, and certainly don't represent the hearts of the people of BP. My first priority is doing all we can to restore the lives of the people of the Gulf region and their families—to restore their lives, not mine." In the meantime, that saw remains stuck, notes AP.