Lord Sewel: the popular press speaks with one voice - he must go
|
Version 0 of 1. Hardly anyone noticed as Lord Sewel rose to high position. He managed to become deputy speaker of the House of Lords without attracting attention. Now he has resigned from that post amid blazing headlines which ensure he will be remembered by millions who had never previously known of his existence. The Sun on Sunday, with a story reminiscent of its previous incarnation as the News of the World, appears to have got its first scalp. Its exposure of Sewel at an (alleged) cocaine-and-sex session was, of course, an invasion of privacy. But the justification for the paper having done so was clear: if he was indeed snorting a class A drug then he was breaking the law. Moreover, he was - to quote the BBC’s assistant political editor, Norman Smith - “the face of public probity for the Lords.” As chairman of the privileges and standards committee, he recently drew up guidelines warning fellow peers of the need to avoid actions likely to bring parliament into disrepute. In such circumstances, the Sun will not have the least trouble arguing a strong public interest defence for its covert filming of Sewel. A police investigation may eventually sort out the truth of the matter, but the fact that Sewel was so swift to step down suggests he is not contesting what the newspaper published. Monday’s tabloids also assumed that the paper’s video footage, combined with allegations by the two sex workers, prove Sewel was up to no good. The Sun calls for him to resign from the Lords, as does the rival Daily Mirror. Its editorial says: “Either Baron John Sewel disproves the drug and sleazy sex allegations recorded on film or the pervert peer should be booted out of the Lords if he fails to do the honourable thing by quitting parliament.” The Daily Mail’s front page headline says the same, “Kick out the cocaine peer”, and its leader fulminates against the culture of the second chamber by widening the argument: “Beyond his [Sewel’s] disgrace... this squalid affair shines a wider spotlight on the disturbingly low calibre of many peers.” In an op-ed piece, columnist Dominic Lawson says the tapes of Sewel’s escapade “will only confirm a widespread view that parliamentarians lead a rarefied and even decadent existence completely out of touch with the concerns of everyday life: this belief is terrible for democracy itself.” He goes on to point out other cases where lords and ladies have managed to avoid losing their peerage privileges despite having misbehaved. The Daily Telegraph, which is the only serious title to splash on the affair, carries an online piece by Stephen Pollard in which he considers the argument that what politicians do in their private life - as long as it’s within the law - is their business. Pollard writes: “There’s only one sensible response [to that viewpoint]: get real.” In Sewel’s case, he says, “he is a cocaine-snorting, prostitute user... who does it in his grace and favour flat, subsidised to the tune of nearly £2,000 a month by the taxpayer.” He continues: “With power comes responsibility. The responsibility not to act like, well, Lord Sewel... No one should have any sympathy for such a man... If we are feeling sorry, let’s think instead about his family. It’s just a pity he didn’t.” Indeed, I couldn’t find any paper, columnist or commentator, willing to do other than condemn Sewel, but I’m always wary of the press when it speaks with one voice. I can understand why. I certainly accept the public interest justification for the Sun’s investigation. But I am also struck by a somewhat cruel streak that runs through Monday’s (rather than Sunday’s) coverage. The guy was down and out after the Sun on Sunday’s revelation. Did he really have to be kicked so hard afterwards? |