I'm not sure who that "everyone" is. I think this is one of the problems -- I think -- this is why I mean it's a rock and a hard place. I don't think there's a magical way between them. You may ultimately have to choose the rock or the hard place, and if the rock is statutory, where you do have that capacity for political oversight, and the hard place is self, where it is independent but there are flaws with that, I think one would prefer to go down the self-regulatory route, where it's essentially an opt-in, contractual model where you may still encounter, as it were, the Desmond problem of some publishers who choose not to opt in, but are still subject to the law of the land -- this is why I reiterate that it's crucial to get the law of the land right and to facillitate access to justice. I think ultimately that's preferable and then to be a member and subscriber to that code becomes a badge of honour for the publications which are involved and you may wish to incentivise membership in various ways and compliance with the code may, as now, be recognised by the courts as one of the incentives for membership and compliance.
I may have missed something but I haven't yet seen a model which somehow charts a magical course between those routes and somehow manages to get the best of both. I'm not sure that it exists.