The proposed ‘Leveson’ amendments to the Data Protection Bill would have threatened the free press by trying to introduce Section 40 and reopen the Leveson inquiry, albeit in relation to data protection. This runs the risk of undermining high quality journalism, and could have a significant negative impact on local press, which is already struggling. The amendments were contrary to the 2017 Conservative Manifesto. The Manifesto stated that we would not be proceeding with Leveson 2 and would repeal Section 40.
The Government wants to ensure the press is well-regulated with high standards, albeit with their freedom protected. Tough new data protection laws will apply to journalists from 25 May. The Bill protects the confidentiality of sources and supports well run investigative journalism, but does not give journalists a free hand. Journalists must secure the information they hold, must assess risk when processing data, and must notify the Information Commissioner of any serious data breaches. A new Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) code of practice for journalists will set clear data protection expectations and the ICO will conduct a statutory review of media compliance with the new law over the next four years. If the media has not changed its ways and abuses the trust Parliament is placing in it, then this review will expose that.
These amendments were not likely to have solved the challenges the media face. After conducting a thorough consultation on the Leveson inquiry, the Government determined that that reopening the Leveson Inquiry is not in the public interest, and that Section 40 is no longer necessary.
The Government is aware of concerns about the effectiveness of IPSO and welcomed the recent changes it has made both to its arbitration and Editorial Code. These changes demonstrate a willingness on behalf of the press to improve their standards of self-regulation without the need for legislation. Many IPSO members equate recognition by the independent Press Recognition Panel (PRP) with state regulation, since the PRP was established by Royal Charter in the wake of Leveson. IPSO has always maintained that it should be judged by its performance against the Leveson criteria for independent and effective regulators, rather than against the Charter.