UK coalition split over press regulation - Clegg may make separate statement in Parliament, arguing
0 replies, posted
[quote=The Independent]The Deputy Prime Minister is considering taking the extraordinary step of dissenting publicly from his own Government’s response to the Leveson Inquiry’s blueprint for the future of a free press in Britain.
In an unprecedented move, Nick Clegg today appeared to have won the approval of the Commons Speaker, John Bercow, to make a separate response to the Leveson Report, after David Cameron, at the same Government dispatch box this afternoon.
The two men are due to meet this morning to try to thrash out a joint approach to the report, but admit this may prove impossible.
In an attempt to win Liberal Democrat support, the Prime Minister is expected to reject the proposals from the Press Complaints Commission for self-regulation of the newspaper industry and will open the door to a form of regulation that is more independent of the industry – but without Parliamentary legislation.
But should Lord Justice Leveson come out strongly in favour of statutory regulation, this may not be enough to win over Mr Clegg, who is determined not to be seen to be giving in to a concerted lobbying campaign by newspapers.
If that is the case, he will make his own response to the report from the Government benches, setting out how his party sees the future of press regulation.
“We would obviously prefer not to do this,” said a Liberal Democrat source. “But clearly we have to examine our options if we can’t agree on a joint way forward. This is as a unique set of circumstances. If there isn’t a collective government view we should be able to express our views.”
A spokeswoman for the Speaker suggested he would not stand in Mr Clegg’s way. “If there was a request from the Government for a second statement that would be a matter for the Government,” she said.
Both Mr Cameron and Mr Clegg spent this afternoon huddled with aides attempting to digest and formulate a response to Lord Justice Leveson’s report to the report from the Government benches, setting out how his party sees the future of press regulation.
“We would obviously prefer not to do this,” said a Liberal Democrat source. “But clearly we have to examine our options if we can’t agree on a joint way forward. This is as a unique set of circumstances. If there isn’t a collective government view we should be able to express our views.”
A spokeswoman for the Speaker suggested he would not stand in Mr Clegg’s way. “If there was a request from the Government for a second statement that would be a matter for the Government,” she said.
Both Mr Cameron and Mr Clegg spent this afternoon huddled with aides attempting to digest and formulate a response to Lord Justice Leveson’s report which was delivered to Downing Street this lunchtime and was said by Government sources to run, in its entirety, to some 2,000 pages.
As he left Prime Minister’s Questions today, Mr Cameron quipped to Mr Clegg: “Right, let’s go away and do our reading.”
In public Mr Cameron promised to seek cross-party agreement on newspaper regulation. The Culture Secretary Maria Miller will meet her opposite number Harriet Harman after the publication of the report to try to agree a joint way forward.
But with Labour backing some form of statutory regulation – should that be recommended by the report – and many close to Mr Cameron opposed to it, any united cross party approach looks unlikely.
In the Commons Mr Cameron warned newspapers that the “status quo” could not continue, and said he wanted to end up with an “independent regulatory system that can deliver”.
“This Government set up Leveson because of unacceptable practices in parts of the media and because of a failed regulatory system,” he said. “I think we should try and work across party lines on this issue, it is right to meet with other party leaders about this issue and I will do so.
“What matters most I believe is that we end up with an independent regulatory system that can deliver and in which the public have confidence.”
The Labour leader Ed Miliband welcomed Mr Cameron’s commitment to consensus and insisted he wanted “real change”.
He told MPs: “I hope we can work on an all-party basis. This is a once-in-a-generation opportunity for real change and I hope that this House can make it happen.”
The Tory MP Philip Davies said statutory regulation of the press was a straight choice, with no third way alternative.
He said: “Can I warn you not to be remembered as the prime minister who introduced state regulation of the press. A free press is an essential part of a free democracy.”
Mr Cameron replied: “I would agree that a free press is absolutely vital to democracy. We should recognise all the press has done and should continue doing to uncover wrong doing, to stand up to the powerful, this is vitally important. Whatever the changes we make, we want a robust and free press in our country.”
Ahead of today’s publication, The Spectator magazine said it would defy any attempt at statutory regulation. In a leading article, it said it would accept contractually binding self-regulation but would not sign up to anything “enforced by government”.
“If such a group is constituted we will not attend its meetings, pay its fines nor heed its menaces. We would still obey the [other] laws of the land. But to join any scheme which subordinates press to parliament would be a betrayal of what this paper has stood for since its inception in 1828,” the unsigned piece read.
In his first intervention on the issue, News International’s chief executive, who was brought in after the resignation of Rebekah Brooks, also warned that statutory regulation would “cross the Rubicon”.
Tom Mockridge said there needed to be “fundamental” reform of media regulation, but insisted that phone hacking victims such as Milly Dowler’s parents should not be able to determine how it is done.
“There’s a strong view across the industry and outside it that the previous structure wasn’t fully effective,” he said. “But you still do not cross the Rubicon. Once the state intervenes, the state intervenes.
“The people who argue for state regulation are saying they are going to trust the politicians in this country for another 300 years not to exploit that, and that is a trust too far.”
Mr Mockridge said no single individual should be able to determine what reforms are brought in, whether it was a member of the Dowler family or the Prime Minister. “They [victims] have a unique moral voice in this but it doesn’t mean they determine the legislation of the state that governs free speech,” he said.
[B][U]Timetable: The Judgement In Full[/U][/B]
[U]Today[/U]
Six copies of the Leveson Inquiry report were handed to the Prime Minister, David Cameron, with one copy expected to be handed to his Liberal Democrat deputy, Nick Clegg.
[U]Tomorrow[/U]
[B]8am:[/B] Labour leader Ed Miliband receives a copy of report.
[B]1.30pm:[/B] Lord Leveson publishes his report on Levesoninquiry.org.uk – where it can be viewed for free by the public. Lord Leveson reads a statement on the report at QE2 Centre, Westminster.
The judge will treat the statement like a judgment and will not take questions. He will leave soon afterwards for a conference on privacy in Australia.
[B]3pm:[/B] David Cameron makes a statement to the House of Commons. Afterwards, Ed Miliband and MPs will give their responses.
[B]4pm:[/B] The Hacked Off campaign holds a press conference.
[U]3 December[/U]
Full debate in the House of Commons on press regulation.[/quote]
[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20526913[/url]
[quote=BBC News][B]David Cameron and Nick Clegg are discussing the Leveson report on media standards, amid reports of a possible coalition split on press regulation.[/B]
If they cannot agree on a response, the PM's Commons statement on Thursday could be followed by the deputy PM speaking in opposition, suggests BBC political editor Nick Robinson.
As well as proposing better regulation, it is understood the report criticises press, politicians and the police.
The report runs to hundreds of pages.
Its details will be made public on Thursday.
Our political editor says that with the Liberal Democrats less likely to be hostile to the possibility of statutory regulation, Mr Clegg could "take the extraordinary step of speaking in the Commons after the prime minister and in opposition to him".
The Lib Dems have asked the House of Commons Speaker whether Mr Clegg can oppose the prime minister at the despatch box for his statement on the report. The office of Speaker John Bercow said it was ready to accommodate the request.
[B]Public confidence[/B]
Labour leader Ed Miliband will not receive his copy of the report until Thursday morning, with Mr Cameron due to address MPs at 15:00 GMT.
The inquiry conducted by Lord Justice Leveson, who presided over eight months of hearings examining the culture, practice and ethics of the press, was set up in the wake of the scandal over phone hacking by journalists at the now-defunct News of the World newspaper.
The inquiry report is widely expected to recommend some form of statutory press regulation overseen by an independent body. The press is currently self-regulated through the Press Complaints Commission (PCC).
Downing Street has said the prime minister is "open-minded" about the future of regulation. Previously he said he intended to implement the findings of the Leveson Inquiry, provided they were not "bonkers".
Speaking at Prime Minister's Questions on Wednesday, Mr Cameron pledged to seek a cross-party consensus on improving regulation from a status quo that was "unacceptable and needed to change".
He said he wanted an "independent regulatory system that can deliver and in which the public have confidence".
Mr Miliband responded: "I hope we can work on an all-party basis. This is a once-in-a-generation opportunity for real change and I hope that this House can make it happen."
Harriet Harman, Labour deputy leader and shadow culture secretary, said she agreed "100%" with the prime minister's comments.
The current complaints system "should be put on a proper footing because it's failed", she told BBC Radio 4's The World at One programme.
She added: "It has to be independent of government and politics and Parliament. We don't want to have anything to do with regulating the press.
"But it's also got to be independent of newspapers. You can't have the editors marking their own homework in the way they have been doing in the past."
Scotland's First Minister Alex Salmond has said he is ready to introduce reformed scrutiny of the press in Scotland if it is recommended in the report.
Brian Cathcart, director of the Hacked Off press reform campaign, said: "The [Leveson] inquiry was established on the basis of cross-party agreement and it is very good news that party leaders are going to work together on the response to the inquiry report."
[B]Underpinning[/B]
A cross-party group of more than 80 MPs and peers, including eight former cabinet ministers and London Olympics chairman Lord Coe, has urged Lord Leveson not to recommend legislation which they say would damage press freedom and give too much power to government.
The group, which wrote to the Guardian and the Daily Telegraph, argued against "the imposition of any form of statutory control even if it is dressed up as underpinning", and instead called for a stronger "self-regulatory" system.
The group backs a proposal from former PCC chairman Lord Hunt and Lord Guy Black, the ex-chairman of the body that finances the commission, for a "totally new" version of the regulator with increased powers.
News International Chief executive Tom Mockridge told the World at One that this was a "template which has a lot of support in the industry".
But some campaigners, like former motorsport executive Max Mosley, say self-regulation has failed and new laws are needed to curb newspapers' excesses.
Mark Lewis, a solicitor for phone-hacking victims including the family of murdered schoolgirl Milly Dowler, said: "Statute sets something up so it can be independent.
"I think it has to have a statute behind it. We talk about statutory underpinning, but it's an independent regulator with a statute behind it that says 'This is enforced', so that newspapers over a certain size are regulated in the same way as TV companies are regulated, so that there is a complaints body, a body that imposes proper ethical standards."[/quote]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.