PRESS REGULATION AND SECTION 40

As this motion is using historical data, we may not have the record of the original ordering, in which case signatories are listed alphabetically.

Motion text

That this House notes the significant consequences for local, regional and national publications if the Government was to commence section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act 2013; recognises that the state should have no role in regulating publications; believes that the commencement of section 40 would curtail the freedom of the press in the UK by creating a chilling effect on journalism and would stifle investigative journalism; further notes that the commencement of section 40 would be an attempt to oblige publishers to sign up to a state-approved regulator or face leaving defendants liable for their own and the plaintiff's legal costs, even if they were vindicated in court, which is an anathema to British justice; is therefore concerned about the potential for an increase of spurious levels of legal action against publishers; notes that the self-regulatory body, the Independent Press Standards Organisation, currently regulates over 90 per cent of the UK's press and is underpinned by contract law; and notes that the terms of reference of Part 2 of the Leveson Inquiry have already been covered by Part 1 and the criminal investigations, and believes that revisiting the same cases risks undermining the courts' verdicts and would be costly to the taxpayer.

The first 6 Members who have signed to support the motion are the sponsors. The primary sponsor is generally the person who tabled the motion and has responsibility for it. The date shown is when the Member signed the motion.