Well, take a not atypical case, where a newspaper writes about, let's say, a dead family member in a way which is extremely upsetting to the family, but is not actionable in law because the person who is being written about is dead, or there's no cause of action.
In those circumstances it seems to me a newspaper that wrote something very unpleasant and intrusive about a dead family member ought to be expected to pay compensation. What we've said here is the compensation levels wouldn't have to be in accordance with the way that the courts do defamation damages. They could be much more modest. Particularly as the code violations would be linked in to what are sometimes called "real remedies". In other words, publications of corrections and apologies. But it does seem to me inappropriate. There are cases in which compensation is right, is the right thing to do.