Press Complaints Commission (Hansard, 12 December 2002)

§ Baroness Blackstone
My Lords, while the Government are currently satisfied with the workings of the Press Complaints Commission, we recognise that, as with any regulatory system, there may always be room for improvement. For this reason, the Government continue to monitor closely the effectiveness of the newspaper industry's self-regulatory system. We would not hesitate to suggest improvements if appropriate.

§ Lord Lamont of Lerwick
My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. Can the noble Baroness explain why, of all institutions in this country, the press is almost uniquely allowed self-regulation in contrast to other institutions for example, the House of Commons, where freedom of speech is equally important? Despite many warnings, is it not clear that many dubious practices are continuing, such as payments to witnesses in criminal proceedings, as highlighted by the Lord Chancellor, contempt of court, as recently highlighted by the Attorney-General, payment to criminals like Ronnie Biggs, and entrapment as in the case of the Countess of Wessex?
Is it not clear that eminent journalists, such as Mr Kelner of the Independent, or, dare I say, Mr Rusbridger of the Guardian, are right in saying that there are too many cosy deals between the commission and the tabloids? What we want is not conciliation or arbitration: it is adjudication by a genuinely independent body.

§ Baroness Blackstone
My Lord, as I am sure is the case with the Opposition, the Government support the principle of a free and responsible press as the cornerstone of our democracy. Newspapers are, and should remain, completely independent of government. It is for the press to decide what, and what not, to publish. The Government are committed to preserving that freedom. However, the Government also continue to believe that effective self-regulation, with a code of practice overseen by the Press Complaints Commission, is preferable to any statutory measure. Nevertheless, as with any regulatory system, there may be room for improvement. The Government certainly expect the press to abide by the rules and the commitments set out in the code of practice.

§ Lord McNally
My Lords, is the Minister aware that, if they run true to form, the press response to the excellent Question from the noble Lord, Lord Lamont, will be to "thcream an'thcream" like Violet Elizabeth Bott about press freedom? Has the noble Baroness read the research by Ian Hargreaves and James Thomas entitled New News, Old News from the University of Cardiff, which 376 shows a catastrophic level of public trust in either the truth or the impartiality of our national press? Any other industry incurring that kind of public contempt would display some sense of urgency as regards putting its house in order in terms of ethics and standards. That is totally absent in our press.

§ Baroness Blackstone
My Lords, I have not seen the research mentioned by the noble Lord, Lord McNally. I should very much like to receive a copy of it, and, indeed, read it. I am certainly aware of a growing lack of trust among the public in the accuracy of our newspapers and in some other aspects of the way they operate. It is for the press to take note of that public concern and to respond accordingly. That must be the position. Where they have legitimate grounds to do so, it must also be the case that members of the public take their complaints to the Press Complaints Commission where they will be properly investigated.

§ Lord Hoyle
My Lords, does my noble friend the Minister agree that what is really needed is a completely independent press commission, that is, one independent of the press barons or their representatives?

§ Baroness Blackstone
My Lords, this is a difficult question—

Noble Lords
Oh!

§ Baroness Blackstone
I believe there is a strong case for involving editors in the Press Complaints Commission. They are a minority. Lay members form the majority on the commission. It is the task of those editors on the commission to take most seriously the issues that are investigated. Where complaints are found to be justified, it is their task to return to the newspaper industry—not just their own newspapers, but to collective discussions in the industry—to ensure that any decisions made by the PCC are acted on.

§ Baroness Buscombe
My Lords, noble Lords are inclined to ask: what are the Government afraid of in relation to the PCC? Does not the Minister agree with Mark Stephens, of Finers Stephens Innocent, that the injustices of cheque-book journalism—for example, in the case of Alex Ferguson, or that of Peter Foster—highlight the need for tougher regulation?

§ Baroness Blackstone
My Lords, there are a whole range of issues on which there is possible need for tougher regulation. As I said in my initial Answer, the Government are carefully monitoring the way that the PCC operates. I have in mind issues about contempt of court. My noble and learned friend the Lord Chancellor is undertaking a review on that very issue at present; I believe it will be completed in December. So it is not true to suggest that the Government are in some way afraid of taking action to investigate whether there is a need for a change in the present arrangements.

§ Lord Taverne
My Lords, are the Government aware that one does not have to be one of their 377 supporters to feel contempt for the vicious hate campaign carried out by the Daily Mail against the Blairs, especially Mrs Blair? The Daily Mail campaign has shown little regard for accuracy or for the truth. It reeks of hypocrisy and smug self-satisfaction. When a newspaper makes false allegations, should not an independent press commission be empowered, of its own accord, to investigate such matters?

§ Baroness Blackstone
My Lords, I associate myself with the remarks made by the noble Lord about the "vicious hate campaign" carried out by the Daily Mail in relation to Cherie Blair. However, for the time being, we have to stick to the current arrangements whereby it is up to any party who feels that he has been maltreated by our newspaper industry to make a complaint to the PCC. It would become extremely difficult to undertake regulation if it were carried out by third parties.

§ Lord Tebbit
My Lords—

Lord Campbell of Croy
My Lords—

§ Lord Williams of Mostyn
My Lords, perhaps we could hear from the noble Lord, Lord Tebbit. A soft question always "turneth away wrath".

§ Lord Tebbit
My Lords, I suppose that I should declare an interest as a director of the Spectator Ltd. Does the Minister consider that there is something faintly undignified, and, to many people, rather unsatisfactory, about a group of politicians attacking the press for not telling the truth, or for even coming out with unworthy stories? Powers exist to pursue the press in cases such as those for contempt of court. We should all welcome it if they were more vigorously used. Should not politicians remember that when they attack the press they are also attacking those who buy the newspapers with such keenness? As for the noble Lord from the Liberal Democrat Benches, I hope that he gets the job he is looking for somewhere.

§ Baroness Blackstone
My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Tebbit, may not be aware of the fact that over 90 per cent of the complaints received by the PCC are from ordinary members of the public. It is right to say that newspapers should be accurate, as should politicians.