| Summary
This country values the ability of the press to comment freely on politics, people and events, to criticise or support public figures and institutions for their actions, and to serve as a platform for others to declare radical or dissenting views. Such freedoms do not exist worldwide. In return, the public expects the press to uphold certain standards, be mindful of the rights of those who figure in the news, and to remain, as far as possible, accurate in its reporting.
Certain recent events, however, have again led the public and politicians to question the integrity of methods used by reporters and photographers to gather material for publication by the press. Chief among these events were the conviction of Mr Clive Goodman, the royal editor of the News of the World, for interception of communications without lawful authority, and the hounding of Ms Kate Middleton, the then girlfriend of HRH Prince William, in the expectation that the two might shortly announce their engagement.
The system of self-regulation of the press constructed in 1991 in the wake of the Calcutt Inquiry in 1990 failed to prevent these lapses, and the image of the press was again damaged as a result. These failures to uphold standards should not, however, be seen as signifying that self-regulation cannot work. To dispense with the current form of self-regulation and to rely exclusively on the law would afford less protection rather than more, and any move towards a statutory regulator for the press would represent a very dangerous interference with the freedom of the press.
Our recommendations therefore seek to draw lessons from recent events to strengthen the existing regime. The events leading to the conviction of Mr Goodman amounted to one of the most serious breaches of the Editors' Code of Practice uncovered in recent times, and his actions have been rightly condemned. Some efforts have been made by the press itself and by the Press Complaints Commission to draw lessons from the conviction of Mr Goodman, although we find it extraordinary that the Commission failed to question Mr Coulson, the Editor of the News of the World at the time that the offences were committed, during the course of its investigation. We welcome the steps taken to exercise more rigorous controls over the actions and expenditure of reporters.
We are, however, concerned at the complacency of the industry's reaction to evidence presented by the Information Commissioner showing that large numbers of journalists had had dealings with a private investigator known to have obtained personal data by illegal means. Although no malpractice by journalists has been proved, that does not mean that no malpractice occurred, and we are severely critical of the journalists' employers for making little or no real effort to investigate the detail of their employees' transactions. If the industry is not prepared to act unless a breach of the law is already shown to have occurred, then the whole justification for self-regulation is seriously undermined.
We also find that the press did not observe its own Code of Practice in relation to Ms Middleton. Editors failed to take care not to use pictures obtained through harassment and persistent pursuit. The response of the Press Complaints Commission was less than impressive: it waited for a complaint to be made on Ms Middleton's behalf but could have intervened sooner by issuing a desist notice to editors.
The Press Complaints Commission has evolved and has become a more open body which provides a better service to complainants. It is proud of its record in increasing the proportion of complaints resolved through conciliation between the complainant and the publication concerned. We support the principle of seeking to resolve complaints through conciliation, and we believe that it would be helpful to publish details of such resolutions, if the complainant so wishes, in order to enhance the public's view of the effectiveness of the Commission and strengthen the understanding by the press and by the public of the principles underlying the Commission's work.
The system for regulation of the press raises serious and complex issues which may merit a broader investigation than we have been able to undertake here. We believe that this is a subject which, particularly in the light of the recent speech by Tony Blair about the behaviour of the press and the regulatory framework for the industry, deserves careful examination in the future.
| 
