Privacy and Injunctions - Evidence - Parliament

Press Complaints Commission, Ofcom, and Authority for Television on Demand—Oral
evidence (QQ 754–818)
Steven Abell: It depends. It creates a certain difficulty if you say, “Phone hacking
reveals that x has happened and I want to have an inquiry to determine that.” If you read
the terms of the inquiry, there is a certain amount of that. Having said that, I think Leveson
is quite clear. You can see already that what he is looking at is relatively broad; it is far more
than phone hacking and goes into all sorts of areas, historical or otherwise. There is a
salubrious moment here for the press for all the problems to come out very clearly. I think
the Culture, Media and Sport Committee has done this to a large extent in the past, but, to
an even greater extent, this is a judicial inquiry where a microscope is being focused on it to
identify problems and solutions. Reading what Lord Justice Leveson is saying, he is
interested in solutions and the pitch between self-regulation and some sort of statutory
support. Therefore, whatever the motivation of the Prime Minister in announcing the
inquiry, there is an awful lot of helpful stuff that can come out of it.
Q817 Mr Bradshaw: But what he said about the PCC sounded your death knell,
did it not?
Steven Abell: He said there had been a failing in this regard.
Q818 Mr Bradshaw: I think he has gone further than that; he has gone on record
to say that the PCC, as far as he is concerned, is finished.
Steven Abell: He actually said a month before that that the PCC had come a long
way in recent years, and subsequent to announcing the inquiry he moved nearer to that. But
his point, and it is a point that I share, was that phone hacking and the concerns that have
been raised created a seismic moment where this needed to be examined. The PCC did not
prevent phone hacking from taking place. I would argue that it is a simplistic approach to say
that it could have done, but we have to accept that this has happened and there is a
legitimate concern that needs to be explored. I do not think it is about saving the PCC or
otherwise. I think that it is about preserving the effective work of the PCC and looking at
ways to make it more effective. That is ultimately something on which one can reach a
degree of consensus.
Chairman: It is five o’clock, so I think we will draw a line at this point. I thank you
very much.
966