The Leveson Inquiry seems to have been going on for ever, but in the way these things work it did not actually take that much time. The problem was that it was heavily featured on the television, mainly because there were so many high-profile witnesses (i.e. newsworthy people) and because the coverage provided a fabulous opportunity for the non-Murdoch owned media to gloat over the discomfort of Rupert and his empire.
Leveson published his report last week – all four volumes
and around 2,000 pages of it – and within what seemed like minutes we had firm opinions
on what it contained, including later the same day the Prime Minister saying
that he was not minded to accept the fundamental recommendation of Lord Leveson
for statutory under-pinning of a new system of self-regulation.
Nobody should be
surprised at how quickly positions taken for or against the recommendations.
Very few people ever bother to wait to read such a report, consider what it
says and then form a view as to the merits of its proposals. Unfortunately, life isn’t like that and so we
cannot expect our politics to be any different. People know what they want, what they agree
with and what they oppose – very few of them are open to persuasion, let alone
to taking a fresh look at their own views (prejudices) and seeing if they stand
the test of independent analysis.
So, let me reveal
one of my own prejudices. Any time Shami Chakrabarti, Director of pressure group Liberty, speaks on a
subject I am immediately likely to find what she says irritating. I know, it shouldn’t be like that, but then
she shouldn’t keep saying such irritating things, should she? In this case, she was one of six Assessors
appointed to the Leveson Inquiry but she has come out against the legal
underpinning recommendation because, she says, it would violate the Human
Rights Act (oh no, not that again!) - "A
compulsory statute to regulate media ethics in the way the report suggests
would violate the act, and I cannot support it."
Now I confess that I have not read the whole document –
one of the many benefits of having retired from my previous full-time
employment. But I cannot easily shake
old habits and so I have read the Executive Summary of the Report.
So, for those who have neither the time
nor the inclination to plough through the Leveson Report, what did it actually
say on this subject? Here’s the
summary:-
The press, operating properly and in the public
interest is one of the true safeguards of our democracy. As a result of this
principle … the press is given significant and special rights in this country …
with these rights, however, come responsibilities to the public interest: to
respect the truth, to obey the law4 and to uphold the rights and liberties of
individuals … principles proclaimed and
articulated by the industry itself (and to a large degree reflected in the
Editors’ Code of Practice). (paras 5 and 6)
Not a single witness has proposed that the Government
or Parliament should themselves be involved in the regulation of the press. I
have not contemplated and do not make any such proposal. (para 12) I
consider that what is needed is a genuinely independent and effective system of
self-regulation. (para 51) In order to
give effect to the incentives that I have outlined, it is essential that there
should be legislation to underpin the independent self-regulatory system and
facilitate its recognition in legal processes. (para 70)
The legislation would not establish a body to regulate
the press: it would be up to the press to come forward with their own body that
meets the criteria laid down. The legislation would not give any rights to
Parliament, to the Government, or to any regulatory (or other) body to prevent
newspapers from publishing any material whatsoever. (para 71)
This is not, and cannot be characterised as, statutory
regulation of the press. What is proposed here is independent regulation of the
press organised by the press, with a statutory verification process to ensure
that the required levels of independence and effectiveness are met by the
system in order for publishers to take advantage of the benefits arising as a
result of membership. (para 73)
Now, if you think all that amounts to a proposal for Government control
of the press and the end of democracy in the UK, then please line up behind the
Tory part of the Coalition, the phalanx of Tory MPs who apparently still fear
to cross Rupert Murdoch, Shami Chakrabarti and others. If, on the other hand, you think that the
press has had enough opportunities to put its house in order, that 8 inquiries
in the last 70 years into the way the press operates in the UK suggests that
leaving things as they are will mean we’ll be faced with another inquiry before
too long, and that what Leveson proposes seems entirely logical, then please
form another queue under the banner of ‘Bound to be disappointed’.
I won’t be able to avoid
a moan for too much longer
After what seems like most of the last
few editions, various readers have asked
me why there have been no moans about Arsenal and their decline from title
contenders to also-rans. My response has
always been that I don’t like to jump on bandwagons and, anyway, everyone
recognises that ‘Arsene Knows’ – he will wave his magic wand and all will be
well again.
I still hope that this is true. I am no longer utterly convinced, however,
and so the time is coming ever closer when a moan will be inevitable.
Come on Arsene – get your collection
of talented players to perform somewhere near to their abilities, give them a
bit of fight to go with their ball-skills.
Beating Tottenham 5-2 every season is simply not enough, if you couple
that with abject surrenders to the likes of (no insult intended) Norwich and
Swansea.
There – that should be enough to
galvanise him and them into action.
White legs and a full
house
I have just had a fabulous weekend
away in one of my favourite places in the UK.
I’m not going to tell you where, since then you’ll all want to go there,
but I will say it’s by the coast and the sun shone all day yesterday. Four hours of walking beside the sea in the
cold, fresh and invigorating air made me feel very tired but full of the joy of
living.
I managed to attend a concert the
previous evening, given by the local choir who have the very great fortune of
being able to sing in one of the best concert halls in the country. The place was all but a sell-out and, from
the comments I heard around me during the interval and at the end, everyone
thought it was a wonderful evening. Oh
well, satisfy your audience and you’ve done well. It was a throwback to the English tradition
of community choral societies, only transferred to a fabulous concert
hall. Those who know me will perhaps be
surprised to hear that my presence lowered the average age of the audience and
would have significantly lowered the average age of the choir too, had I been
on stage with them.
I’m glad I went, though. There was one star of the evening and that
was the soprano soloist – her performance made the journey and the cost of the
ticket worthwhile, absolutely brilliant.
I really can’t say the same about all the others, including one who seemed
to think that having been on TV and been promoted as one of this year’s ‘young
things in the classical world’ meant he had arrived. He hadn’t, at least in any kind of musical
sense.
There were other highlights too. The energetic contribution of the orchestra
leader was a constant source of interest.
The lilywhite legs of the cellist were a constant distraction – suggest
she wears some black tights next time.
And I’ll never again think bad thoughts about the dress sense of our own
choir’s conductor – at least he never tries to look like Gandalf.
p.s. to avoid confusion, I should add that the image above is not taken from the actual concert ...........
No need to rub it in!
One of the great delights of being out
and about is the way that the smell of fresh bread or the look of a cream cake
or Danish pastry can lure you into a café so you can then enjoy a relaxing time
over a cup of coffee or tea whilst consuming the produce that enticed you there
in the first place.
Unfortunately, I had the misfortune to
be diagnosed as a coeliac sufferer just over a year ago. So, no more fresh bread and mouth-watering
cakes for me. I think I have coped quite well, all things
considered. Obviously, I still go into
places that sell such enticing foods because my wife needs to eat. The chances of going somewhere and finding
that they offer gluten-free cakes are very slim – and even then those cakes
will never be able to compete with the real thing in terms of smell, looks and
taste L But worst of all is to go
somewhere to be told by the waitress (also the owner in this case) that “oh yes, we normally do gluten-free cakes
but we have run out today”.
Cruel.
There ought to be a law against it.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments welcomed - although I reserve the right to behave grumpily when I read them