9 May 2012 | Uncategorized
Cross-posted with Full Fact
The Cabinet agreed yesterday that Ministers will not exercise the right to request redactions of evidence submitted to the Leveson inquiry.
Yesterday Full Fact, English PEN, Index and the Media Standards Trust made an urgent application to the Leveson Inquiry for transparency regarding Government ministers’ new status as ‘core participants’ in the Inquiry.
We asked for transparency over access to confidential Inquiry material and government redaction requests, and to keep politically-appointed Special Advisers out of the process.
A few hours later a spokesman for No 10 told the Times: “We will not be making any requests to redact material.” He said the decision not to seek redactions applied to the whole of the Government, not only No 10.
The application was considered this morning by Lord Justice Leveson and he decided not to make the directions we asked for. We will be studying his reasons when the transcript is available.
However, he did emphasise his respect for Full Fact and the other applicants and his willingness to publicise attempted abuses of the redactions process by core participants. He also reemphasised his commitment to transparency.
Full Fact shares his view that transparency is vital to trust in the Inquiry’s eventual recommendations and are pleased to have played our part in enabling these significant issues to be fully considered in public.
Our focus now returns to helping to make sure the Inquiry produces the best possible recommendations for the future of press regulation and relations between politicians and the press.
William Moy is a director of Full Fact
4 May 2012 | Leveson Inquiry
Update 15:21 — Eight government ministers have today been granted core participant status at the Leveson Inquiry, meaning they will have advance access to evidence and the right to seek redactions of other statements submitted. Lord Justice Leveson rejected the application by the government as a body, but granted individual CP status to David Cameron, Nick Clegg, Vince Cable, Ken Clarke, George Osborne, Theresa May, Jeremy Hunt and Michael Gove, who will be known as “government core participants“.
The coalition government will this afternoon make an application to be a core participant at the Leveson Inquiry, in a special hearing announced today.
If granted, this would mean that the government would have advance access to written statements and attachments submitted in module three of the Inquiry, which is examining relations between the press and politicians.
The Inquiry states that individual or an organisation can become a core participant if they are deemed by Lord Justice Leveson to meet one or more of the following criteria:
- the person played, or may have played, a direct and significant role in relation to the matters to which the inquiry relates;
- the person has a significant interest in an important aspect of those matters to which the inquiry relates; or
- the person may be subject to explicit or significant criticism during the inquiry proceedings or in its report
Those already granted CP status in module three include Guardian News and Media, Associated Newspapers and News International; the Metropolitan police; the National Union of Journalists, and former News International CEO Rebekah Brooks, who is scheduled to give evidence to the Inquiry next Friday. MPs including Tom Watson, Denis MacShane, Tessa Jowell and Chris Bryant have also been granted CP status.
Today’s hearing is scheduled to take place at 2pm.
Follow Index on Censorship’s coverage of the Leveson Inquiry on Twitter – @IndexLeveson
2 May 2012 | Leveson Inquiry
A statement released by the Leveson Inquiry late last night has raised doubts as to whether the second part of the Inquiry into press standards will go ahead, due to concerns over value and costs.
In the statement, Lord Justice Leveson expressed concern over the “enormous cost (both to the public purse and the participants)” and voiced his fear that the Inquiry may “trawl over material then more years out of date”.
While not ruling out the possibility of a second part, Lord Justice Leveson said: “It is likely that the process of pre-trial disclosure and trial will be lengthy so that Part 2 of this Inquiry will be delayed for very many months if not longer.”
He added:
In those circumstances, it seems to me that it is in everyone’s interests that Part 1 goes as far as it possibly can. If the transparent way in which the Inquiry has been conducted, the Report and the response by government and the press (along with a new acceptable regulatory regime) addresses the public concern, at the conclusion of any trial or trials, consideration can be given by everyone to the value to be gained from a further inquiry into Part 2.
Part Two of the Inquiry, intended to commence after any possible criminal trials would have been completed, would examine the extent of unlawful or improper conduct at News International and other media organisations.
Part One, which is currently underway, is looking at the culture, practices, and ethics of the press and will make recommendations based on the findings this autumn.
Follow Index on Censorship’s coverage of the Leveson Inquiry on Twitter – @IndexLeveson
23 Apr 2012 | Leveson Inquiry
Two media barons took to the stand at the Leveson Inquiry this afternoon as the first day of “proprietors week” continued.
Evgeny Lebedev, proprietor of the Independent and the London Evening Standard stressed the importance of maintaining a free, strong and robust press, describing it as an “element of British democracy which needs to be preserved at any cost”.
He added: “Those who have committed crimes need to be punished. As we’ve seen in recent revelations there’s been an extraordinary abuse of power by the press and I think the outcome of the Inquiry should prevent that from happening again.”
Lebedev also expressed concerns that intense regulation of meetings between proprietors and politicians risks creating a society where elements become feeble. He said: “If the press becomes too feeble, we end up with a tyranny of consensus.”
He added that this kind of scrutiny would “completely change the balance of how things work in Westminster,” and agreed when asked if Lebedev meant that meetings between the press and politicians was “part of the discourse of politics”.
Lebedev explained that both the Evening Standard and the Independent both aimed “to support and champion world class journalism that is ethically sound, in the public interest and an aid to Britain’s democracy”, despite their differing political leanings.
Counsel Carine Patry Hoskins read the court an excerpt from an article published in the New Statesman from July 2011, in which Boris Johnson “gushed” about the oligarch: “I’m proud to call him a friend”. Lebedev told the court “there are varying degrees of friendship, but yes, I would consider him a friend.”
Stressing that he considered himself to be a Londoner, Lebedev added that he and Boris Johnson only discussed topics that “any Londoner would be interested in”.
Lebedev added that as they were operating within “the same sphere of existence” it was important for him to maintain relationships with politicians, including the Mayor of London, and the Prime Minister. He described meeting with Johnson, along with David Cameron, former Prime Minister Gordon Brown, UKIP leader Nigel Farage, and explained he would soon be meeting newly-elected MP George Galloway.
Despite his relationship with politicians, and his interest in politics, the proprietor told the court he had never been asked by the Prime Minister to support a particular political party or policy.
In terms of the future of media regulation, Lebedev supported the concept of a statutory underpinning, and said that every part of the industry needed to be involved, and added that “self regulation should not be shrouded in impenetrable jargon”.
Also appearing before the court, Aidan Barclay, chairman of the Daily Telegraph publisher Telegraph Media Group (TMG), described his relationship with politicians.
Accepting that the Telegraph is unapologetically Conservative “with both a small and large C”, Barclay described a “cordial business relationship” with David Cameron.
The court heard how Barclay sent a series of texts to Cameron, congratulating him on the birth of his daughter, and referring to a “daily call” to the paper during the elections.
Barclay described his relationship with Tony Blair as “relaxed and social” and added that despite Blair’s interest in the press, there was never any discussion of topics of an editorial nature.
He added that being in touch with politicians enabled newspapers to do their jobs properly: “It’s very important to me that the Telegraph is involved in everything that goes on. In 2004, when we arrived at the Telegraph, it was in a situation where it never spoke to the Labour party and had fallen out with the Conservative party.”
Barclay also explained that even though the Operation Motorman leak table contained no entries in relation to TMG, the organisation took steps to make sure no journalists had been involved with payment to private investigators.
In terms of regulation, Barclay said it was necessary to strike a balance between “some standards of operations”, but it was important not to destroy the industry through “regulation creep”.
He added: “I’m concerned that we don’t go too far in the proposals, rules and regulations can layer on top of one another”.
Follow Index’s coverage of the Leveson Inquiry @IndexLeveson
