A progressive alliance for decency in the news media defeats the Government in the Lords

In writing my preview of last week’s events in the Lords, I rather glossed over the debate on the Data Protection Bill on Wednesday. That will rather teach me to do more research, as it turned out that there was to be an attempt to set up a new Leveson-style inquiry into the nefarious activities of some of our news outlets…

As the noble Lord Greaves pointed out last week, Wednesday saw the Government defeated on a vote to require them to set up and inquiry into issues arising from data protection breaches committed by or on behalf of news publishers. Amendment 127A, moved in the name of crossbench Peer, Baroness Hollins, read as follows;

Amendment 127A

“(1) The Secretary of State must, within the period of three months beginning on the day on which this Act is passed, establish an inquiry under the Inquiries Act 2005 into allegations of data protection breaches committed by, or on behalf of, news publishers.(2) The inquiry’s terms of reference must include, but are not limited to,— ​(a) to inquire, in respect of personal data processing, into the extent of unlawful or improper conduct within news publishers and, as appropriate, other organisations within the media, and by those responsible for holding personal data;(b) to inquire, in respect of personal data processing, into the extent of corporate governance and management failures at news publishers;(c) in the light of these inquiries, to consider the implications for personal data protection in relation to freedom of speech; and(d) to make recommendations on what action, if any, should be taken in the public interest.”

For the Liberal Democrats, Brian Paddick noted that his own personal records had been obtained illegally by a private detective in the employ of a national newspaper, but focussed on the hacking of Milly Dowler’s mobile phone by journalists.

However, it was perhaps Tom McNally who, in two paragraphs, neatly summarised why the amendment was necessary;

The truth is, we are where we are because the press that the noble Lord, Lord Black, speaks for – I make no criticism of that — decided that they would not co-operate. We could have had a working system backed by a royal charter from the beginning. Those of good will on all sides could have made that effective. It was the decision of the noble Lord and his friends not to make it work. Everything we have had since then flows from that determination that they would not make the legislation, which passed through both Houses with massive majorities, work. That is why we are in the position we are in now.

We then have to add to that the fact that, sadly, the Conservatives decided to go back on the pledge that the Prime Minister of the day made to the victims that they would have the full second inquiry. They put it into their manifesto, which, noble Lords may have noticed, did not get the approval that they would then claim as a strength in this House.

And, despite a staunch defence by the likes of Danny Finkelstein (Times) and Guy Black (Telegraph), Lady Hollins was not to be deterred.

In the vote that followed, 118 Labour Peers, 76 Liberal Democrats, 34 Crossbenchers and ten assorted others (including two Conservatives) were triumphant by a margin of twenty-nine over the Government.

We await the Government’s response with interest…

* Mark Valladares is the House of Lords correspondent for Liberal Democrat Voice.

Read more by or more about , , , or .
This entry was posted in News and Parliament.
Advert

3 Comments

  • Tony Greaves 15th Jan '18 - 10:39pm

    Yes, a good afternoon’s work. (By the way since I am being pernickety in all this, if you want to address me as “noble”, the phrase is not “the noble Lord Bloggs”, it’s “the noble Lord, Lord Bloggs”. Or whoever! With similar stuff and nonsense for other genders and ranks… eg the noble Baroness, Lady Bloggs. Or the noble Earl, Lord Bloggshire. Personally I prefer “Tony Greaves” though there are times you have to go with the flow. My mother called me Anthony and I never complained.)

  • Richard O'Neill 15th Jan '18 - 11:51pm

    It is depressing that the Media seem to have got away with their misdeeds simply be shouting “freedom of the press” at the top of their voices.

  • suzanne Fletcher 16th Jan '18 - 3:48pm

    Also there was the work done by Sally Hamwee and Brian Paddick on the personal data and possible impact on migrants. you can read it here http://libdemfocus.co.uk/ld4sos/archives/1251

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

To have your photo next to your comment please signup your email address with Gravatar.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?

Advert



Recent Comments

  • Richard
    Freddie is right. With gas in short supply the last thing anyone should do is to encourage demand by keeping the price artificially low. What the govt should be...
  • Roland
    Need to be careful, if the government steps in and effectively caps energy prices, that will also cap VAT receipts. So the extra VAT etc. should be seen more as...
  • Lorenzo Cherin
    The Liberal Democrats are ahead of others here, though slow in my view as too lets say keen on a more economically traditional approach, at least for uk norms. ...
  • Roland
    Whilst I don't fully agree with Michael BG's list of suggested remedies, he has hit the nail on the head, as to the main causes of the current price increases -...
  • Roland
    @Alex Macfie >@Peter Hirst’s idea is probably unworkable, as what’s to stop passengers from travelling on combinations of free short-distance ticket...