| Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
11.11 pm
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Culture, Media and Sport (Janet Anderson): I congratulate my hon. Friend the Member for Glasgow, Kelvin (Mr. Galloway) on securing tonight's debate. I note that he says that the views of the newspapers for which he writes do not always coincide with his own. He also said that he would not dwell on his own experience at the hands of the media because we did not have sufficient time. For the same reason, I will not dwell on my experience of the media.
I am not the first Minister to respond to a debate in the House on the issue and I am sure that I will not be the last. I am only sorry that there are not more members of the press present to hear tonight's important debate.
Recent behaviour of certain sections of the press has provoked concerns in the House and renewed, in some quarters, calls for greater controls on the press. I also
know that many in the House are of the view that sections of the press have recently gone way beyond the spirit and the letter of the Press Complaints Commission's code of practice, and I have some sympathy with those views. However, my hon. Friend will agree that we must avoid knee-jerk responses. As we have all too often seen in the past, such responses rarely, if ever, result in an effective solution to a perceived problem.
We should also remind ourselves that a free press remains the cornerstone of our democracy. Quite simply, we cannot have a free democratic society without a free press.
We can justifiably be proud of a long tradition of press freedom in this country. Since 1696, there has been no Executive intervention in the content of newspapers in peacetime. Newspapers are, and should remain, independent of government. It should be for the press to decide what and what not to publish, subject to the general law.
The press has frequently demonstrated that it is a powerful force for good in our society and the Government are committed to preserving the freedom necessary for it to fulfil its proper role. That is why we have repeatedly stated our preference for self-regulation--a position that my hon. Friend will support. We have expressed reluctance to introduce statutory regulation or a privacy law. At present, the Government have no plans, nor see any pressing reason, to introduce legislation to regulate the press.
Under the present system of self-regulation, the Press Complaints Commission seeks to conciliate between those who are aggrieved about alleged press abuses and the newspaper concerned, and, where that fails, to adjudicate according to a code of practice that has been agreed by the newspaper and magazine industry.
The code, to which my hon. Friend referred, covers many different issues, including intrusion into privacy, intrusion into grief or shock, opportunity to reply, payment for articles and, above all, inaccuracy. The PCC published a revised code of practice on 19 December 1997, with increased safeguards against intrusion and harassment, and protections for children. Most of the matters are not covered by the criminal or civil law, and thus the present arrangements give people an avenue of complaint that would not otherwise be available and which is fairly rapid and free. It is important to note that the great majority of those who complain to the PCC are satisfied with the outcome.
That is not to say that the Government believe that self-regulation is working perfectly. The Government expect the press to abide by the rules and commitments enshrined in the code of practice, and we continue to review the effectiveness of press self-regulation by monitoring alleged press abuses and the PCC's handling of them.
Ministers and my officials are in regular contact with the PCC to discuss a number of issues. The Government have repeatedly stated our desire to see further improvements to self-regulation. We have no hesitation in suggesting such improvements to both the PCC's operations and the code, as and when we think necessary. I thank my hon. Friend for his contribution to that process.
From my discussions with the noble Lord Wakeham, I know that he welcomes this continuing dialogue, and he is always open to considering suggested improvements to the code. However, we should recognise that any improvements are likely to be most effective if they are made with the general consent of the press. I do not underestimate the difficulty of achieving that.
I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising this important issue. I recognise that the behaviour of certain elements of the press has, in recent weeks, caused concern and distress to many--my hon. Friend mentioned some of those instances--but I do not believe that that should lead us to conclude that the time for statutory regulation is right. In my view, self-regulation continues to be the best way in which to ensure high editorial standards in this country. Let us not forget that, despite the occasional lapse, the history of the press over the last decade or so has been, by and large, one of continued responsible improvement.
The Government continue to be committed to monitoring the effectiveness of the current self-regulatory system. I thank my hon. Friend again for his suggestions and comments on the code, breaches of the code and possible punishment for such breaches, and I thank him particularly for what he says about entrapment, about which there has been great concern in recent weeks.
I noted with interest what my hon. Friend said about whether the PCC should be able to initiate its own investigations without a complaint being made to it, and he made a valid point in support of the present system. Recent events will feed into the continuing monitoring process that the Government will carry out in terms of the effectiveness of the system. In my opinion, the basic rationale for self-regulation has not been damaged by those recent events.
I conclude by quoting from an editorial in The Observer on 30 May, which said:
Question put and agreed to.
"A free press, warts and all, is an indispensable component of democracy. If we some saw some warts last week, don't forget that wider truth."
In what has been a difficult few weeks for the press, that is a sentiment with which I hope most hon. Members can concur. Once again, I thank my hon. Friend for raising this important issue. I assure him that we will take note of everything that he said during the debate.
9 Jun 1999 : Column 763Adjourned accordingly at nineteen minutes past Eleven o'clock.
| Index | Home Page |