Leveson Inquiry Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Cabinet Office

Leveson Inquiry

Ben Bradshaw Excerpts
Thursday 29th November 2012

(12 years ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton Portrait The Prime Minister
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

This is absolutely the key argument that has to be had in our cross-party discussions. Lord Leveson is saying that the statutory underpinning is necessary properly to give effect to this independent body. Of course, he intends it to be a very neat, very small piece of statute, but paragraph 71, for instance, states that the law would not

“give any rights to these entities…except insofar as it would require the recognised self-regulatory body to have the power to direct the placement and prominence or corrections and apologies.”

Once we try—and we have tried it—writing a law that provides for statutory underpinning that describes what the regulatory authority does, what powers it has and how it is made up, we soon find we have quite a big piece of law. That is the concern. We need to think very carefully before crossing that Rubicon.

Ben Bradshaw Portrait Mr Ben Bradshaw (Exeter) (Lab)
- Hansard - -

How, without the statutory underpinning that Lord Leveson says is essential, does the Prime Minister think a new body could prevent a newspaper group simply from walking away or ignoring the new body’s findings?

Lord Cameron of Chipping Norton Portrait The Prime Minister
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Lord Leveson does not himself have an answer to the question of what happens if a newspaper walks away. His system is a voluntary system, so the same question applies to his system too.