HC Deb 22 December 1997 vol 303 cc639-40
1. Mr. Ottaway

What plans he has to introduce privacy legislation applying to the press. [20156]

The Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Jack Straw)

We have no plans for general legislation on privacy. The data protection Bill will be concerned only with the privacy of personal information. The Human Rights Bill, which is before another place, simply incorporates into British domestic law obligations under the European convention on human rights to which this country has been subject continuously since the convention was ratified by the United Kingdom in 1951.

Mr. Ottaway

Given that the Lord Chancellor has made it clear that the Press Complaints Commission is a public authority and will therefore be bound to apply the principles of the European convention on human rights, does the right hon. Gentleman think that the PCC has worked so far, that it will work under its new code; and, if not, would it not be better to have a statutory right of privacy rather than leaving it to judge-made law that applies the principles of the convention?

Mr. Straw

We do not accept that there is a case for general legislation on privacy. Whether the judges develop what the hon. Gentleman describes as judge-made law on privacy is a matter for them and it would arise whether or not the European convention were incorporated and whether that particular form of incorporation were accepted. I know that the hon. Gentleman supports incorporation because he voted for a Bill in favour of incorporation that came before the House in 1987. As to the code, our guess—it can only be a guess—is that, in adjudicating between breaches of articles 8 and 10 of the convention, the courts will properly be bound to take into account the extent to which newspapers have complied with the Press Complaints Commission code.

Mr. Skinner

Is my right hon. Friend aware that he is correct in his stance of not introducing legislation on privacy? Throughout my time as a Member of Parliament, I have never had a letter from a constituent asking us to bring in a law to protect the great and the good—and, by and large, that is what it is all about. We hear the aristocracy and one or two other groups—and the Tories, from time to time—squealing and saying, "Protect us." I do not believe that we should and I hope that my right hon. Friend will continue with that stance even if some interfering busybodies in the common market want him to change his mind.

Mr. Straw

As to the latter group of people, it is worth pointing out that the data protection Bill has to be brought before the House only because of the data protection directive, which the previous Administration allowed to go through and which binds the United Kingdom Government and Parliament to introduce legislation in accordance with that directive by the middle of next year.

Sir Brian Mawhinney

A few months ago, the Home Secretary was given legal advice by the Lord Chancellor as to the possibility of judicially driven privacy law emerging from the incorporation of the ECHR into British law. More recently, the right hon. Gentleman was given exactly the opposite advice from the Lord Chancellor. I wonder which he thinks is right and preferable.

Mr. Straw

The right hon. Gentleman knows enough about the workings of government to know that the Law Officers give legal advice, not the Lord Chancellor. His position is exactly as I expressed it at the press conference on the publication of the Human Rights Bill—that, while that is ultimately a matter for the courts and not for us, there is every indication that, if the Bill on incorporation is enacted as drafted, the Press Complaints Commission will be regarded under clause 6 of that Bill as a public authority for its purposes.