This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/media/2013/oct/07/ministers-seek-compromise-over-press-regulation

The article has changed 5 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Ministers to seek compromise over post-Leveson press regulation Newspapers' plans for post-Leveson press regulation rejected
(about 3 hours later)
Coalition ministers are expected to try to prevent Wednesday's meeting of the privy council from turning into a final rejection of the newspaper industry's proposed system of self-regulation – and instead efforts will be made to explore a compromise around parliament's proposed rival system. Plans on how to regulate the press industry have been delayed until later this month after a difficult meeting of the key players rejected the regulatory plans proposed by the industry but also could not agree whether to back the royal charter passed by parliament.
The privy council – which meets in front of the Queen – is due to determine the industry's request for a royal charter to recognise its proposed system of self-regulation, and has been expected to reject it. The privy council is due to meet on Wednesday and will reject the industry version of the charter.
If this is what happens, it is open to the privy council to seal an alternative royal charter proposed by all three party leaders at the same meeting. But it appears politicians would prefer a delay to see whether modest revisions can be made to the proposal, in order to win over the recalcitrant industry. Campaigners for victims of press intrusion believed the meeting of the privy council would then seal the royal charter proposed by parliament at the same meeting.
In practice, all decisions will be made by ministers to ensure that the privy council attended by the Queen does not become embroiled in political controversy. A subcommittee of eight coalition ministers has been examining the industry's favoured version of press regulation for months, but there is still little trust between government and the press – even though in theory their differences are small. However, it is understood David Cameron dug in his heels and told his Liberal Democrat partners that it would be better to delay a decision until later in the month.
One seasoned press executive described the mood: "Victims don't trust the press, the press don't trust the politicians or [campaign group] Hacked Off. The whole thing needs to be de-escalated. Everyone is in such entrenched positions but everyone is on such a small plot of land, they are not on different battle lines, they are in small potholes on the same side. Agreement is so close yet so far." Sources suggested that a special privy council would be held on 30 October, coincidentally at the time when the phone-hacking trials are likely to have started.
Ministers are thought to be considering giving ground by offering a concession to local papers. The industry has warned that the cross-party proposal for an arbitration unit to resolve complaints that might otherwise go to court would cripple local papers, already struggling financially. Fraser Nelson, editor of the Spectator, said in a blog late on Monday night: "We don't need politicians' permission to have a free press in Britain: it's a sacred right we have enjoyed for more than three centuries.
The newspaper industry continues to have serious concerns about the government-proposed recognition panel, a body that would be established by parliament's royal charter and would validate and audit the work of any replacement for the much criticised Press Complaints Commission. "What the privy council is now proposing would be illegal in America, where freedom of speech is protected in the first amendment."
Lord Leveson envisaged that the panel would do a health check on a new regulator once every three years, but under the government proposal it would have the power to audit the watchdog more frequently. This has led to fears that, under pressure from lobby groups, it could audit so frequently it would become the de facto regulator with more powers than the self-regulatory body. Nick Clegg as well as the Labour party pressed David Cameron to accept the royal charter set out by parliament and all three main political parties, but the prime minister argued it was better to see if a compromise could still be reached in which the industry and the politicians could agree on the relatively narrow points of contention between them. Clegg may express his frustration at the attitude of the media and the prime minister.
If the press charter is ruled out, there is a possibility that the main newspaper groups, including the owners of the Daily Mail, the Sun, the Telegraph and the regional newspaper groups will launch their own breakaway body regardless. In practice, all decisions will be made by ministers to ensure that the privy council attended by the Queen does not become embroiled in political controversy. A subcommittee of eight coalition ministers had been examining the industry's favoured version of press regulation for months, but there is still little trust between government and the press – even though in theory their differences are small.
Meanwhile, in a sign of the anger among victims of press harassment at the delays, Hacked Off has written to Lord Rothermere, proprietor of the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday, urging him to look again at the need for an inquiry into his paper's practices. The peer had previously rejected a call by Labour leader Ed Miliband to mount such an inquiry in the wake of the row over the Daily Mail's hostile articles about his father, Ralph Miliband. Trevor Kavanagh, columnist on the Sun and confidant of Rupert Murdoch, said the development was a victory for those who wanted to suppress the British press.
Writing in the Guardian, Hugh Grant, the actor and Hacked Off director, said: "The big newspaper groups are very isolated now. They know that what they are resisting was recommended by the judge after a long and painstaking public inquiry. They know it is endorsed by all the leading victims of their abuses in recent years – people like the McCanns, Christopher Jefferies and the mother of Abigail Witchalls, whose evidence at the inquiry was so shocking. They know, too, that the charter has the backing of every party in parliament – a remarkable constitutional rarity." "It has to be seen as a great victory for the forces of oppression of a free press, Hacked Off in particular and the politicians who have gone along for the ride," he told Newsnight.
He said the "bizarre process" did not follow the recommendations of Lord Justice Leveson and that the industry had come up with a solution it believed ticked all the boxes and avoided "political input".
"The privy council is a political input," Kavanagh said. He believed the industry would carry on with its plans to develop a self-regulator but newspaper groups would have to consider the government decision before formally settling on the next steps.
One seasoned press executive described the mood: "Victims don't trust the press, the press don't trust the politicians or [campaign group] Hacked Off. The whole thing needs to be de-escalated. Everyone is in such entrenched positions but everyone is on such a small plot of land. They are not on different battle lines, they are in small potholes on the same side. Agreement is so close yet so far."
If the press charter is ultimately ruled out, there is a possibility that the main newspaper groups, including the owners of the Daily Mail, the Sun, the Telegraph and the regional newspaper groups, will launch their own breakaway body regardless.
Meanwhile, in a sign of the anger among victims of press harassment at the delays, Hacked Off has written to Lord Rothermere, proprietor of the Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday, urging him to look again at the need for an inquiry into his paper's practices. The peer had previously rejected a call by Labour leader Ed Miliband to mount such an inquiry in the wake of the row over the Daily Mail's hostile articles about his father, Ralph Miliband. On Monday night, David Cameron also endorsed Ed Miliband's decision to challenge the Daily Mail. The prime minister told Tom Bradby on ITV's The Agenda: "What was wrong was the headline, he clearly didn't hate Britain. Ed was right to come out."
Writing in the Guardian, Hugh Grant, the actor and Hacked Off director, said: "The big newspaper groups are very isolated now. They know that what they are resisting was recommended by the judge after a long and painstaking public inquiry.
"They know it is endorsed by all the leading victims of their abuses in recent years – people like the McCanns, Christopher Jefferies and the mother of Abigail Witchalls, whose evidence at the inquiry was so shocking. They know, too, that the charter has the backing of every party in parliament – a remarkable constitutional rarity."
Executives at the publisher of the Daily Mail did not respond to the Guardian seeking a response to the Hacked Off letter.Executives at the publisher of the Daily Mail did not respond to the Guardian seeking a response to the Hacked Off letter.
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.