Well, I think it's important, since you're looking at structural things, to very much preserve the very, very good work that the PCC does, and now I'm on the other side, I have used it on behalf of my clients and it does provide an excellent, quick, free service which resolves things on the go. And if you're a type of person who is on one of the newspaper websites, which reach now many, many millions of people, you're not so interested in what's going on happen in a few months' time; you want it changed as matters unfold. And I think the PCC is very well placed to help with things like that, and I think preserving that ombudsman service, which it does do brilliantly, is essential.
In terms of the phone hacking lessons, obviously I think the PCC would maintain it never tried to get to the bottom of the issue because it couldn't, and I think actually what we've been talking about today in terms of 2009 shows in very sharp relief the limitations it was under, but I think there's talk of having some sort of separate standards body that would do that, but that, I think, maybe should be separate from the complaints-driven things.
In terms of the membership of the Commission, that's obviously a major problem, having one newspaper group outside. I think ways must clearly now be found to make sure that people take part. One of the issues, obviously, is the passage of time. In 1990, when the PCC was set up, all the groups were agreed that this was the right thing to do, but proprietors change and editors come and go and people's agendas change and so on, and there must be some mechanism available. I think the that the industry will be given the chance or may be given the chance to show how that can be done, and if not, then it might just be the time to come up with a simple piece of legislation that just outlines that the industry should come together and provide an ombudsman service for the members of the public, because, at the heart of this, really, is protecting the public from what can be, obviously, the overweening, occasionally, power of the press.
And finally, I think I'd say that the landscape around the PCC was clearly changing. It was set up before the days of the Internet, before the days of the Human Rights Act, and as I said before, the time that proprietors thought it would be a good idea to come out of the system on the basis of not liking the biscuits or whatever it was, and clearly issues around the Commission have changed, and one of the most significant ways is the development of privacy. And what has happened is what a lot of people warned would happen, which is that you've had a sort of a two-tier system. There's no -- we actually developed some ways of obtaining compensation for people in a voluntary way but I think there needs to be a recalibration of that, so that -- I think there's become an expectation that privacy intrusions will be compensated in some way, perhaps not all of them, but certainly the more serious ones.