Then finally, if I can move forward to tab 25, Mr Dorrell, again to you, 24 April 1995, our page 03974. He's thinking now: how does one present the so-called "do nothing" option? On the next page, under the heading "Press reaction", the issue of criminal offences doesn't seem to be troubling the press so much. They say:
"On the contrary, the press are increasingly fearful that some of the tabloids are dragging them ineluctably towards something far worse, statutory regulation of some sort."
Then on the final paragraph of this section:
"On press reactions to a statutory tort, there should be no illusion. The proposal would give rise to a major storm and in my view would fail in Parliament."
So there are two limbs there, aren't there, and you've dealt with both of those.
"The opposition would oppose it, arguing that any action on this front must be matched by a Freedom of Information Act. Business managers are nervous about trying to legislate for criminal offences in this Parliament. The argument applies in spades to trying to legislate the tort."
In the end, the "do nothing" option was seen to be the least bad choice. We see that towards the bottom of 03976. Or rather, it wasn't quite the "do nothing" option, to be fair. (iii), level with the lower holepunch. I think those are your ticks or marks?