This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2013/feb/12/leveson-what-happened-next

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Leveson report: what happened next – Q&A Leveson report: what happened next – Q&A
(7 months later)
What was the Leveson report about?What was the Leveson report about?
It was always supposed to be about the parents of Milly Dowler, Madeleine McCann and other innocent victims of press harrassment. So when Lord Justice Leveson delivered his thumping four-volume report in late November, no one expected him to give newspapers another chance to drink in what the former cabinet minister David Mellor famously described as the "last chance saloon" where unethical behaviour and alleged criminality were tolerated.It was always supposed to be about the parents of Milly Dowler, Madeleine McCann and other innocent victims of press harrassment. So when Lord Justice Leveson delivered his thumping four-volume report in late November, no one expected him to give newspapers another chance to drink in what the former cabinet minister David Mellor famously described as the "last chance saloon" where unethical behaviour and alleged criminality were tolerated.
In the wake of the phone-hacking scandal Leveson recommended that the existing self-regulator, the Press Complaints Commission, be scrapped after 21 years and replaced by a new body backed by statute. However, in a concession to the industry he agreed to another chance for non-statutory self-regulation, setting out 47 recommendations that would ensure the new body would be free of any influence by editors or politicians.In the wake of the phone-hacking scandal Leveson recommended that the existing self-regulator, the Press Complaints Commission, be scrapped after 21 years and replaced by a new body backed by statute. However, in a concession to the industry he agreed to another chance for non-statutory self-regulation, setting out 47 recommendations that would ensure the new body would be free of any influence by editors or politicians.
The old, secretive ways of the regulator should be swept aside and a new body governed by an independent board appointed in a "genuinely, open, transparent and independent way", Leveson said. It would have the power to launch investigations into papers that systemically breached the code of ethics and to impose fines of up to £1m.The old, secretive ways of the regulator should be swept aside and a new body governed by an independent board appointed in a "genuinely, open, transparent and independent way", Leveson said. It would have the power to launch investigations into papers that systemically breached the code of ethics and to impose fines of up to £1m.
Leveson said he was not convinced that phone hacking was confined to "one or two practitioners of the 'dark arts'", and criticised newspapers for their "recklessness in prioritising sensational stories". The damage to people like the Dowlers and the McCanns had been "devastating", he said.Leveson said he was not convinced that phone hacking was confined to "one or two practitioners of the 'dark arts'", and criticised newspapers for their "recklessness in prioritising sensational stories". The damage to people like the Dowlers and the McCanns had been "devastating", he said.
He also found a "a cultural tendency within parts of the press vigorously to resist or dismiss complainants almost as a matter of course" and said that even when an apology was agreed, some newspapers retained the upper hand, resorting to "high-volume, extremely personal attacks on those who challenge them".He also found a "a cultural tendency within parts of the press vigorously to resist or dismiss complainants almost as a matter of course" and said that even when an apology was agreed, some newspapers retained the upper hand, resorting to "high-volume, extremely personal attacks on those who challenge them".
How did the government respond?How did the government respond?
Within an hour of publication David Cameron surprised everyone with his unequivocal rejection of Leveson's proposals for new legislation, saying this would "cross the Rubicon" and end centuries of press freedom. He was accused of reneging on his promise to deliver a body that would protect victims. Hacked Off, the campaign group set up during the hacking scandal to campaign for press reforms, was so furious it refused to meet the culture secretary, Maria Miller.Within an hour of publication David Cameron surprised everyone with his unequivocal rejection of Leveson's proposals for new legislation, saying this would "cross the Rubicon" and end centuries of press freedom. He was accused of reneging on his promise to deliver a body that would protect victims. Hacked Off, the campaign group set up during the hacking scandal to campaign for press reforms, was so furious it refused to meet the culture secretary, Maria Miller.
Cameron's decision not to support statutory underpinning set him on a collision course with Labour and the Liberal Democrats, who support a Leveson law.Cameron's decision not to support statutory underpinning set him on a collision course with Labour and the Liberal Democrats, who support a Leveson law.
What happened next?What happened next?
The central issue for Labour and Hacked Off was finding a legal mechanism that would "verify" the work of the body without legislating directly for it. If self-regulation was to work, there needed to be a further body that could audit its performance and this needed to be established by law, as recommended by Leveson. Hacked Off argued this was a mere "smidgeon" of law that did not pose a threat to press freedom.The central issue for Labour and Hacked Off was finding a legal mechanism that would "verify" the work of the body without legislating directly for it. If self-regulation was to work, there needed to be a further body that could audit its performance and this needed to be established by law, as recommended by Leveson. Hacked Off argued this was a mere "smidgeon" of law that did not pose a threat to press freedom.
The newspaper industry accepted most of Leveson's recommendations but not a statute, giving ammunition to critics who believed Cameron was surrendering to press interests. Labour and Hacked Off published their own Leveson bills and the Lords fast-tracked legislation threatening to derail the whole process while the Tories worked out the detail of their proposals, published on Tuesday.The newspaper industry accepted most of Leveson's recommendations but not a statute, giving ammunition to critics who believed Cameron was surrendering to press interests. Labour and Hacked Off published their own Leveson bills and the Lords fast-tracked legislation threatening to derail the whole process while the Tories worked out the detail of their proposals, published on Tuesday.
What are the Tory proposals?What are the Tory proposals?
Under their plans, hatched by Cameron's chief fixer Oliver Letwin, a royal charter similar to that which established the BBC or the British Council would establish the new press watchdog and act as its "verifier". Without a statute, Hacked Off said, this solution was "even weaker" than the much maligned PCC.Under their plans, hatched by Cameron's chief fixer Oliver Letwin, a royal charter similar to that which established the BBC or the British Council would establish the new press watchdog and act as its "verifier". Without a statute, Hacked Off said, this solution was "even weaker" than the much maligned PCC.
On Monday Madeleine McCann's father, Gerry McCann, who has campaigned for tighter regulation, called on Cameron to stick to his promise to protect victims of press harassment and said something had to be done about "the sick culture" in parts of the press.On Monday Madeleine McCann's father, Gerry McCann, who has campaigned for tighter regulation, called on Cameron to stick to his promise to protect victims of press harassment and said something had to be done about "the sick culture" in parts of the press.
At the same time Labour's deputy leader, Harriet Harman, said she was sure that if the royal charter plans did not satisfy Labour, parliament would ensure Leveson would be implemented. The party has threatened to force a vote on the issue this month.At the same time Labour's deputy leader, Harriet Harman, said she was sure that if the royal charter plans did not satisfy Labour, parliament would ensure Leveson would be implemented. The party has threatened to force a vote on the issue this month.
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.