Yes. We do respectfully make that submission, sir, and we do make the principal submission that costs become a barrier not only to those that need to complain but also to the newspapers that are dealing with the complaints that are made against them.
May I mention briefly one other area of civil law, and that's the law of privacy. I don't propose to develop the very detailed submissions that have been put in on the law of privacy and its development, but I hope I can make this submission. Back in 1990, when David Calcutt QC, to whom there's already been reference, was appointed to head the departmental committee into measures necessary to give protection to individual privacy and whether statute was required, that led to the 1991 establishment of the Press Complaints Commission, but the failure to develop any statutory law on privacy was then overtaken by, of course, the jurisprudence incorporated by the Human Rights Act in 1998, and it might be thought that when you analysed the vast majority of the complaints before you and consider the general nature of the culture, ethics and practices of the press, that many of these take place against a law of privacy which -- and it is a failure of the law and has been acknowledged as such -- has been less than certain. Perhaps it is now beginning to develop in a way that responsible journalists and those advising consumers and those making complaints can have some better idea of what the outcome is going to be, but uncertainty in the law, particularly in this area, has been a particular vice.
In that respect, of course, sir, you have to deal with the fact of the different categories of people and their approaches to privacy. I've set that out in paragraph 9 of your written submissions, but in our submission there are people who provide details of their private life which others consider to be far too much information, and that you can see from some of the magazines and social media, and there are some people who are happy and content with good press coverage, even where it is intrusive, but are then very unhappy with negative press coverage, particularly where it is intrusive, and there are others who are very protective about their privacy full stop and end of story, but people don't always stay in those same categories, and of course the difficulties of trying to identify that have formed the backdrop to some of the cases before you.
Can I then turn to regulation and start with the principled aim of regulation. In our submission, the most effective statement about regulatory intent was said in relation to the regulation of lawyers, who are also known to sin and fail, in Bolton v The Law Society, and that is in 1994, 1 Weekly Law Reports, and that was Lord Bingham in the Court of Appeal effectively setting out the principled aim of regulation, and it is not to punish, that can be an effect of regulation, and it is not to compensate, that can be an effect of regulation; it is to ensure that maintenance and indeed the enhancement of standards in the regulated area.