THE PRESS CHARTER (Hansard, 22 February 1979)

§ The Earl of KINNOULL
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question which stands in my name on the Order Paper.

Lord WALLACE of COSLANY
My Lords, the Government's consideration of the Press Charter is continuing, following the completion of a long and detailed series of consultations with those in the industry carried out by my honourable friend the Minister of State for Employment. The Press Council is an independent body set up by the industry and is one of the parties which remain to be consulted under the terms of the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Amendment) Act 1976.

§ The Earl of KINNOULL
My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for that reply. Will he not agree that it is a little disappointing that an Act of Parliament which was passed in March 1976—nearly three years ago—to write in the freedom of the Press under a Press Charter has still not been drafted or provided for Parliament? Secondly, if the interested parties continue to agree to disagree, could he say at what stage the Minister will introduce a draft Press Charter to Parliament, as laid down under the Act?

Lord WALLACE of COSLANY
My Lords, I can understand the noble Earl's anxiety about this matter, but I do not believe that there has been any undue delay. Press freedom is a complex 1912 subject, as noble Lords will know from the length of our debates when the legislation was before this House in 1976. The Government naturally wish to establish as much common ground between the parties as possible before laying a draft Charter before Parliament. As regards what steps my right honourable friend can take, there are few that he can take until some measure of agreement has been reached. There are still a number of consultations to be held. Until a reasonable measure of agreement has been reached he will not be in a position to bring it before Parliament.

§ The Earl of KINNOULL
My Lords, will the noble Lord say how close is the agreement? I believe that the report of the noble Lord, Lord Pearce, was submitted to the Government some months ago indicating the consultations in which he had taken part between the interested parties. How close is the agreement? Can he give an undertaking that the Government will ensure that safeguards will be written into the Press Charter, particularly safeguarding editors and journalists, as provided under the Act?

Lord WALLACE of COSLANY
My Lords, it is very difficult for me to give any details of what has been agreed. The noble Lord, Lord Wigoder, in a previous Question on another occasion raised the same matter. However, I can say that some progress has been made at these meetings and that the report of the noble Lord, Lord Pearce, indicates a large measure of agreement on the basic objectives of the Charter. For example, the parties declared support for the principle of the freedom of the Press to collect and publish information, to publish comment and criticism, and to abstain from the exercise of any improper pressure upon editors. However, there was less agreement on the best methods of putting it into practice. On several important points the parties still remained far apart. That is the situation, and I am afraid that that is as far as I can possibly go in giving information about what has been agreed.

§ Lord McGREGOR of DURRIS
My Lords, while accepting that the freedom of the Press is a complicated issue, would not my right honourable friend, or rather the noble Lord, agree that the Royal 1913 Commission on the Press which reported in the summer of 1977 gave a great deal of attention to an analysis of this issue, set out six essential safeguards, and made a series of recommendations for the content of a Press Charter in default of the agreement of the Committee of the noble Lord, Lord Pearce? Would the noble Lord explain why his right honourable friend has been unable to accept the recommendations of the Royal Commission in respect of the content of the Press Charter?

Lord WALLACE of COSLANY
My Lords, I thank my noble friend for the implied compliment, which nearly put me off my stroke. However, in point of fact, all the recommendations, such as my noble friend mentioned, are still the subject of negotiation, and until we can get all the parties to come to some measure of agreement—which, strangely enough, they seem very loath to do—there is nothing that can be done at present. I accept the valuable contribution made by the Royal Commission. It is now a question for the parties involved to adopt the same attitude to the matter as I and many of my colleagues.

§ Lord LEATHERLAND
My Lords, would not my noble friend think that the best way to ensure Press freedom is to leave the Press free, subject only to the laws of libel?

§ Lord McGREGOR of DURRIS
My Lords, would not the noble Lord agree that the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Amendment) Act 1976 required the Secretary of State to lay a draft Charter before Parliament in default of agreement among the parties?

Lord WALLACE of COSLANY
My Lords, yes; but it would be a very unwise Minister who did so in spite of a great deal of opposition. The best thing that can be done, so far as my right honourable friend, the Government and Parliament are concerned, is to get the largest possible measure of agreement. There is very little use in having a Press Charter as regards which the majority do not agree on one point or another.

§ Lord LEATHERLAND
My Lords, in view of that answer, may I ask again 1914 whether the introduction of a Press Charter would do something to interfere with the freedom of the Press?

Lord WALLACE of COSLANY
My Lords, my noble friend has had vast experience in the past in many areas of journalism, and my mind boggles at trying to find a suitable answer to his rather difficult question.