The transcripts of the official inquiry into the culture, practices and ethics of the press. More…

Yes. We sort of went over them. I give you -- well, paragraph 86, in a nutshell, it seems clear to me that it should be unacceptable and illegal to deprive a person of their fundamental human right to privacy unless there is a real public interest defence. It's not rocket science and the ways I would protect it are (1) I would resist the clamour of the privacy-stealing industry to close down our privacy law as it's emerged through common law, through the Human Rights Act, and I would disband the PCC and create a proper regulator with teeth, which would not only protect people from abuses of privacy or libel as a first port of call, but it would also be there to protect good journalism. You know, this is the other side of all this. I'm, for instance, keen on libel reform. I'm keen to see good journalism protected as much as one possibly can. I'm the reverse of a muzzler. But I personally feel that the licence that the tabloid press has had to steal British citizens' privacy for their commercial profit -- very often vulnerable British citizens -- is a scandal that weak governments for too long have allowed to pass.

Keyboard shortcuts

j previous speech k next speech