Leveson 2 would be a threat to a free press

The House of Lords voted on Wednesday to require the Government to establish a new public inquiry into the press. Why? It is true that David Cameron when Prime Minister envisaged that the procedure chaired by Lord Justice Leveson should be in two stages, but the first inquiry was so comprehensive that there seems no earthly point in revisiting this subject now the prosecutions are over. What more could possibly be uncovered that is not already known?

An amendment to the Data Protection Bill now before Parliament was used to try to force the Government’s hand.  Many have reason to feel aggrieved and there is no doubt that some newspapers have previously behaved badly.

But this has been dealt with by the courts and through the payment of substantial sums in compensation. The first Leveson inquiry cost taxpayers £5.4 million, yet the legal bill for the newspaper industry to comply with the process was far more than that. The industry is facing severe financial pressures and is competing with totally unregulated online media giants. Piling more costs on their shoulders risks the future of a vibrant and independent press.

Some proponents of a new inquiry want it to look at events that happened some 15 years ago – and the industry has long since moved on. The independent regulator to which most newspapers subscribe has brought about a sea-change in attitudes. Parliamentarians are always saying they are in favour of a free press, and yet their actions tell a different story. When this amendment comes before MPs they should throw it out.

Baroness Hollins- Apology

This article has been amended since its first publication as the original may have been understood to mean, contrary to our intention, that Baroness Hollins or her family had sought and received financial compensation through the courts for the misreporting of the serious assault on her daughter. We are happy to make it clear that neither Baroness Hollins or any of her family have claimed any such compensation and  Baroness Hollins had not misled the House of Lords in relation to this matter. We apologise to Baroness Hollins and her family for any distress caused.