Privacy and Injunctions - Evidence - Parliament

Chris Blackhurst, editor, The Independent, Evgeny Lebedev, chairman, Independent Print Ltd
and Evening Standard Ltd, and Andrew Mullins, managing director, Evening Standard Ltd and
Independent Print Ltd—Oral evidence (QQ 1103–1154)
whatever it is going to be called, to be independent of the industry and of course
independent of the Government. The public, whose trust we are trying to regain, need to
feel that the body is genuinely independent of the industry. It needs to be transparent so that
people can understand how it is set up; how the code of conduct is written; who writes it;
who sits on the board; how the chairman is elected; and so on. It basically has to have the
trust of the people—the general public, the readers—and of the industry itself.
Q1121 Lord Thomas of Gresford: Would you therefore support some form of
statutory backing for such a body and not leave it simply as a voluntary organisation? The
Daily Express has opted out. Would you be in favour of a statutory body that could require
newspapers to join?
Evgeny Lebedev: I think it was Jeremy Hunt who said to this Committee that there
should be some sort of statutory underpinning that forces everyone to be part of it. It
certainly cannot be voluntary. I do not think it necessarily needs to have statutory powers,
but there needs to be a way to force people to sign up to it. Then, once they have signed up
to it, it is a binding contract, which means that they have to abide by it. If they are ordered
by this body to pay a fine, they pay the fine. If they are ordered to put an apology in the
newspaper, they do that.
Q1122 Lord Thomas of Gresford: How would that body set standards?
Evgeny Lebedev: It would still have to have a code of conduct committee, but I
think that that committee has to consist of people who are independent of the industry, so
not acting editors, for example. It still needs to have journalists and people who understand
how the industry works, but not have people setting up rules for themselves.
Q1123 Lord Thomas of Gresford: Would Mr Blackhurst support a body setting
up a code in which no editor was represented?
Chris Blackhurst: Yes, I would. I think we speak more or less as one here. I think
there is general recognition among editors, including myself, that the PCC, as it is currently
set up, is not fit for purpose. I think that that is regrettable. It is sad, but it is a reflection of
the fact that the public has lost faith, and we as editors cannot ignore that. There is
something wrong with the system—at least, they think there is something wrong with the
system. The system therefore needs fixing. One of the criticisms made is that the PCC is too
under the influence of serving editors, and one way to restore trust would be to have in this
new body, a newly constituted PCC, a majority of people taking decisions, who are lay
members and not serving editors. Yes, I would agree.
Q1124 Lord Black of Brentwood: May I come back to the Evening Standard for a
moment? This might be for Mr Lebedev or Mr Mullins. You were talking quite rightly about
the changing business model for newspapers. We have heard a lot of evidence in this
Committee about the difficulties that particularly regional newspapers are facing: falling
advertising, falling readership and the challenge of the internet. Could you talk a little more
about the decision to make the Evening Standard free and whether that was due to
459