UK Parliament / Open data

Media Bill

Proceeding contribution from George Eustice (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 30 January 2024. It occurred during Debate on bills on Media Bill.

I had multiple conversations with lots of publishers when the original Leveson architecture was put together, particularly around the royal charter. I know that Private Eye has always objected to joining anything at all, and it would be completely unaffected by the proposal. It is not a member of the Independent Press Standards Organisation, and it was never a member of the Press Complaints Commission. It has always remained entirely aloof, and there is nothing in the proposal that affects its position. Nor would anything in the proposal affect, say, The Spectator, which also has a view that it would not join a recognised regulator.

As I said, small publishers that want to do genuine investigative journalism and that do not have people with deep pockets standing behind them could benefit from the proposal by signing up to a recognised regulator. Many of them are already members of Impress, which is the recognised regulator at the moment, but others may form different regulators or encourage IPSO to join and seek recognition, so that they can benefit from that cost protection.

1.30 pm

I intend to press amendment 2 to a Division later. I hope the Government will recognise that they can accommodate the provision and that it can be consistent with their manifesto commitment. I hope that we will

not hear any nonsense from the Front Bench about freedom of the press, because what I am suggesting would strengthen the freedom of the press, rather than weakening it.

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
744 cc751-2 
Session
2023-24
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Legislation
Media Bill 2023-24
Back to top