Phone Hacking

Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton Excerpts

Tuesday 15th November 2011 Lords Chamber

[Baroness Rawlings]

My Lords, we are not aware of a campaign against Leveson or his inquiry, which started yesterday. We wish it the best passage, because it is very important, as will be the Communications Act that we will be discussing here.

[Baroness Farrington of Ribbleton]

My Lords, will the noble Baroness define the difference between public interest as a defence and prurient interest? The noble Baroness seemed to imply that public interest could be used as a defence against an allegation of breaking the law.

[Baroness Rawlings]

My Lords, regarding public interest, editors are responsible for the truth and for what is published in a newspaper, not the source of the story. If a story is not accurate, a range of options is available: the editor, the PPC or the courts, depending on the nature and the scale of the inaccuracy. We do not believe that additional safeguards on this point are necessary, but of course we will await the results of Lord Justice Leveson’s inquiry into the wider ethics of the press.