Press law - So why did he do it?

 

Prime Minister David Cameron: "We have a workable system ready to go"

Why did David Cameron take his own deputy as well as some senior figures in his own party by surprise by pulling the plug on all-party talks to create a new press regulator?

Just three hours before the prime minister declared that the talking was over and it was time for MPs to choose between the Tory or the Labour/Lib Dem approach, Nick Clegg had told the BBC: "We had a productive meeting - David Cameron, Ed Miliband and myself - yesterday afternoon. We'll have further discussions and I hope we'll make progress… I'm not going to start imposing artificial timetables"

Cameron's critics will say that the answer is simple: he has chosen to side with the press barons - the Murdochs, Barclays, Rothermeres and co - and to ignore the victims of press hacking and intrusion - the Dowlers and the McCanns.

When I put this to the prime minister he answered, in effect, that what was good for the victims was to have a workable solution ie a system of press regulation which is tough but with which the newspapers will co-operate, and to have it set up soon.

Whoever is right a more subtle political calculation has been made inside Number 10.

The PM has always known that he is likely to be defeated in the Commons on this issue. It is Ed Miliband and not him who leads a coalition on press regulation of Labour, the Lib Dems and some Conservative MPs and peers too.

They had found a way to tack votes on a new press regulator onto other government bills setting up, for example, a National Crime Agency or a new law on defamation. Government business managers would have faced the choice between losing those measures or keeping them with a press law attached. When they did so Cameron would have been accused of being in office but not in power- someone who couldn't, to quote the Labour leader, organise anything in a brewery.

So Cameron decided to pre-empt them and to pick a fight on his own terms and at a time and place of his choosing. By doing so he still faces the likelihood of defeat (though nothing is certain on an issue on which few have fixed views). He will still face being attacked for abandoning the victims.

However, he will calculate that he has demonstrated to the public that he is willing to deal with the issue of press excesses at the same time as indicating to the newspapers that he is fighting for press freedom whilst his opponents are desperate to shackle the press. He will argue that the public want parliament to spend time on the economy, welfare reform, schools and the NHS whilst his opponents want to get bogged down on the minutiae of press regulation.

Above all though, perhaps David Cameron's calculation was that his defiant Downing Street news conference would make him look like a leader at a time when his own party has been questioning how long he should carry on in the job.

 
Nick Robinson Article written by Nick Robinson Nick Robinson Political editor

NHS: Where will the money come from?

Beneath the rhetoric there is a lot of consensus on the NHS but where will the money come from to fund the big changes needed?

Read full article

More on This Story

More from Nick

Comments

This entry is now closed for comments

Jump to comments pagination
 
  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 456.

    "Either for press freedom or against it"?

    What a silly thing to say. Either you are for the freedom to snoop into ordinary people's lives, buy the government and make huge profits from writing pernicious trash or you're against it - more like!

    Looks like Dippy Dave and his pals are for it. Well, plenty are not. Good subject for a referendum, or a General Election.

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 455.

    sadly Cameron puts his press cronies before the Dowlers and the McCanns and others. I found Gerry McCann's comments very persuasive. I would hate to have gone through what Kate and Gerry suffered at the hands of the unregulated press. Freedom - yes. Vitriol -no. For once Miliband/Clegg may have a good idea.

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 454.

    Labour's Charter "might work", for now, for Leveson & for the Victims, but despite some fine words, on "effectiveness, fairness and objectivity of standards, independence and transparency of enfacement and compliance, credible powers and remedies", it makes no mention of the corrupting pressures revealed before Leveson, thereby condoning their institutionalisation by unstable economic inequality

  • rate this
    0

    Comment number 453.

    It's just so obvious--- Cameron needs to keep in with his Cotswold chums-- he wants to continue his supper parties with Rebekah Brooks and the Murdochs-- he doesn't care about the McCanns or the rest of us Plebs-- He's a Tory--- they are self-serving and only look after their own.

  • rate this
    +1

    Comment number 452.

    Better protected than the BBC Charter, Labour's Press Charter does afford 'more equality' between ordinary public & powerful industry

    It allows the independent panels to make majority appointments to Boards (NOT to be vetoed by any mere grudge), and allows the Regulator to "direct APPROPRIATE remedial action" (rather than merely "require remedial action" as in the Cameron draft)

    It might work...

 

Comments 5 of 456

 

Features & Analysis

Elsewhere on the BBC

  • EarthWater world

    Are ‘oceans’ hiding inside Earth? BBC Future investigates

Programmes

  • Francis Rossi, co-founder of band Status QuoHARDtalk Watch

    Status Quo's Francis Rossi explains how alcohol led him to take cocaine

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.