英國三大黨就報業監管改革達成協定 擬設獨立監管機構
原標題：英國擬新設獨立機構監管報業
國際線上消息（記者 涂赟）英國三大主要政黨18日就報業監管改革達成協定，決定設立一個新的監管機構對深陷竊聽醜聞的英國報業進行獨立監管。
在經過長達五個來小時的爭論和協商後，英國聯合政府兩大政黨及反對黨工黨的代表終於在18日淩晨兩點半就是否及如何設立一個新的報業監管機構達成了協議。
英國首相、保守黨領導人卡梅倫當天下午在議會下院提出動議，設立新的監管體系。
卡梅倫表示，“這一體系將確保報業在違規時進行公開道歉、接受百萬英鎊的罰款、一個在成員任命及經費來源上獨立的自我監管機構、健全的行業標準、向受害者免費提供的仲裁服務、以及一個快速的投訴處理機制。”
這一新的監管體系是對“萊維森調查”報告的回應。負責對英國《世界新聞報》竊聽醜聞進行獨立調查的大法官萊維森去年底發佈調查報告，認為應該建立一個新的機構對英國報業進行獨立監管，以防止媒體的濫用權力。
這一建議得到了英國主要黨派的贊同。不過與報告所提通過立法程式來建立這樣一個機構稍有不同的是，三大政黨協商後決定，這樣一個機構應該通過皇家特許的方式設立。
“通過詳細的立法的方式（來設立這樣一個機構）在原則上是錯誤的，這將會給政客們以後（通過立法手段）對報業進行監管、施壓提供方便之門。”
卡梅倫認為，通過皇家特許這種不需議會投票的形式來設立這一機構，可以最大程度地確保該機構的獨立性及新聞自由。這一新的監管機構同時也獨立於新聞界，新聞媒體也不能對進行監管的人選投反對票。
反對黨工黨的領導人米利班德也敦促英國所有新聞出版機構接受這一體系。他表示，“因為這樣做意味著我們都可以向前邁進一步，這一體系能夠讓曾經的受害者重拾（對報業）的信心，同時也能讓新聞媒體在監督那些強勢者時約束自己不濫用手中的（監督）權力。”
英國現有一個媒體自律機構——報業投訴委員會，這個機構的成員包括各大報紙出版公司的代表。新成立的獨立監管機構的成員預計絕大多數為獨立人士。
主張新聞自由的團體認為政府的這一新動議或多或少都將威脅到英國的新聞出版自由，但代表竊聽受害者利益的團體則對政府的措施表示歡迎。
這一設立新監管機構的動議預計不會在議會受阻。相關皇家特許狀將於5月提交英國女王批准通過。
Party leaders told MPs the charter would preserve press freedom and protect victims of press intrusion.
Many of the major newspapers said they needed time to study the details.
Press reform campaign group Hacked Off has welcomed the deal.
It follows Lord Justice Leveson's inquiry into press ethics, which found that journalists had hacked thousands of phones. He called for a new, independent regulator backed by legislation designed to assess whether it is doing its job properly.
'Without delay' Prime Minister David Cameron said the Conservatives, Liberal Democrats and Labour had agreed on a new system of "tough independent self-regulation that will deliver for victims and meet the principles set out in (Leveson's) report".
He said a new system would ensure:
But there was confusion over how the plans would extend to the rest of the internet - with one Downing Street aide telling the BBC it would not cover blogs such as Guido Fawkes' political commentary.
While the charter is intended to cover organisations publishing in the UK, the Scottish government has asked Westminster to clarify the Scottish impact of plans for press regulation, which is a devolved matter.
Labour leader Ed Miliband said the agreement satisfied the demands of protection for victims and freedom of the press.
Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg said he hoped newspaper groups would see the logic of the deal and back it.
The charter will not be passed by MPs, but will need to be approved at the May meeting of the Queen's Privy Council - advisers to the Queen, mostly comprising senior politicians.
Meanwhile, a clause in the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Bill, which will mean that the charter cannot be amended without a two-thirds majority in Parliament, was approved in the Lords on Tuesday evening.
And a separate bill, the Crime and Courts Bill, will have amendments ensuring that newspapers who refused to join the new regulatory regime would be potentially liable for exemplary damages if a claim was upheld against them.
The three main parties differed over whether this amounted to bringing in a new law.
Mr Cameron said a press law had been avoided - although he conceded the clauses were "two very important but relatively small legislative changes" that needed to be made.
Mr Miliband said there was statute underpinning the charter, "which is actually protecting it from being changed".
BBC political editor Nick Robinson said the press had been informed over the days and months of wrangling, with key players being Telegraph's Lord Black, Associated Newspapers' Peter Wright, the editor of the Times John Witherow and the editor of the FT Lionel Barber.
'Deeply contentious' In a joint statement, the Mail and Telegraph groups, Northern and Shell, News International, the Newspaper Society and the Professional Publishers Association said the industry had not been represented in Sunday night's talks.
It said early drafts of the charter had contained "several deeply contentious issues" which had not been "resolved with the industry".
"We are not able to give any response on behalf of the industry to this afternoon's proposals until we have had time to study them," the statement concluded.
The Sun and others have previously said they would accept everything recommended by Lord Justice Leveson - except statutory legislation.
Evan Harris of campaign group Hacked Off was at the overnight talks with three other pressure group members. The group later said it believed the deal "can effectively deliver" Lord Justice Leveson's recommendations.
But the idea of a charter was criticised by free speech campaign group Index on Censorship. Chief executive Kirsty Hughes said the decision was a "sad day for press freedom in the UK".
She said: "Index is against the introduction of a royal charter that determines the details of establishing a press regulator in the UK - the involvement of politicians undermines the fundamental principle that the press holds politicians to account."
國際線上消息（記者 涂赟）英國三大主要政黨18日就報業監管改革達成協定，決定設立一個新的監管機構對深陷竊聽醜聞的英國報業進行獨立監管。
在經過長達五個來小時的爭論和協商後，英國聯合政府兩大政黨及反對黨工黨的代表終於在18日淩晨兩點半就是否及如何設立一個新的報業監管機構達成了協議。
英國首相、保守黨領導人卡梅倫當天下午在議會下院提出動議，設立新的監管體系。
卡梅倫表示，“這一體系將確保報業在違規時進行公開道歉、接受百萬英鎊的罰款、一個在成員任命及經費來源上獨立的自我監管機構、健全的行業標準、向受害者免費提供的仲裁服務、以及一個快速的投訴處理機制。”
這一新的監管體系是對“萊維森調查”報告的回應。負責對英國《世界新聞報》竊聽醜聞進行獨立調查的大法官萊維森去年底發佈調查報告，認為應該建立一個新的機構對英國報業進行獨立監管，以防止媒體的濫用權力。
這一建議得到了英國主要黨派的贊同。不過與報告所提通過立法程式來建立這樣一個機構稍有不同的是，三大政黨協商後決定，這樣一個機構應該通過皇家特許的方式設立。
“通過詳細的立法的方式（來設立這樣一個機構）在原則上是錯誤的，這將會給政客們以後（通過立法手段）對報業進行監管、施壓提供方便之門。”
卡梅倫認為，通過皇家特許這種不需議會投票的形式來設立這一機構，可以最大程度地確保該機構的獨立性及新聞自由。這一新的監管機構同時也獨立於新聞界，新聞媒體也不能對進行監管的人選投反對票。
反對黨工黨的領導人米利班德也敦促英國所有新聞出版機構接受這一體系。他表示，“因為這樣做意味著我們都可以向前邁進一步，這一體系能夠讓曾經的受害者重拾（對報業）的信心，同時也能讓新聞媒體在監督那些強勢者時約束自己不濫用手中的（監督）權力。”
英國現有一個媒體自律機構——報業投訴委員會，這個機構的成員包括各大報紙出版公司的代表。新成立的獨立監管機構的成員預計絕大多數為獨立人士。
主張新聞自由的團體認為政府的這一新動議或多或少都將威脅到英國的新聞出版自由，但代表竊聽受害者利益的團體則對政府的措施表示歡迎。
這一設立新監管機構的動議預計不會在議會受阻。相關皇家特許狀將於5月提交英國女王批准通過。
Press regulation deal struck by parties
David Cameron, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband all claim victory in Leveson deal
A
deal has been struck between the three main political parties on a new
press regulation regime in the wake of the phone-hacking scandal.
An independent regulator will be set up by royal charter with powers to impose million pound fines on UK publishers and demand upfront apologies from them. Party leaders told MPs the charter would preserve press freedom and protect victims of press intrusion.
Many of the major newspapers said they needed time to study the details.
Press reform campaign group Hacked Off has welcomed the deal.
It follows Lord Justice Leveson's inquiry into press ethics, which found that journalists had hacked thousands of phones. He called for a new, independent regulator backed by legislation designed to assess whether it is doing its job properly.
'Without delay' Prime Minister David Cameron said the Conservatives, Liberal Democrats and Labour had agreed on a new system of "tough independent self-regulation that will deliver for victims and meet the principles set out in (Leveson's) report".
Christopher Jeffries on a new regulator
- upfront apologies from the press to victims
- fines of 1% of turnover for publishers, up to £1m
- a self-regulatory body with independent appointments and funding
- a robust standards code
- a free arbitration service for victims
- a speedy complaints system
But there was confusion over how the plans would extend to the rest of the internet - with one Downing Street aide telling the BBC it would not cover blogs such as Guido Fawkes' political commentary.
While the charter is intended to cover organisations publishing in the UK, the Scottish government has asked Westminster to clarify the Scottish impact of plans for press regulation, which is a devolved matter.
Continue reading the main story
To anyone outside Westminster this must all sound like not so much a dance, but more an enthusiastic disco on the head of a pin.
The political songs the leaders are playing demonstrate the shimmying under way over the ownership of this deal and the deft moves over the language to describe it.
It all revolves around a horrible phrase you would brace yourself for encountering on the instructions to a piece of flatpack furniture: "statutory underpinning".
It means a reliance on the law; an assault, many newspapers have long argued, on long-held freedoms of the press.
In the Commons, the prime minister was categoric: the royal charter that will oversee the new regulator will not be underpinned in law.
Labour leader Ed Miliband and Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg were equally categoric too. It will, they said.
And if second best is the twin of compromise, victims of the press and lobbyists for its freedom appear to be meeting in the middle, but newspapers remain nervous.
Analysis
The political songs the leaders are playing demonstrate the shimmying under way over the ownership of this deal and the deft moves over the language to describe it.
It all revolves around a horrible phrase you would brace yourself for encountering on the instructions to a piece of flatpack furniture: "statutory underpinning".
It means a reliance on the law; an assault, many newspapers have long argued, on long-held freedoms of the press.
In the Commons, the prime minister was categoric: the royal charter that will oversee the new regulator will not be underpinned in law.
Labour leader Ed Miliband and Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg were equally categoric too. It will, they said.
And if second best is the twin of compromise, victims of the press and lobbyists for its freedom appear to be meeting in the middle, but newspapers remain nervous.
Announcing the draft royal
charter, Mr Cameron told MPs: "What happened to the Dowlers, to the
McCanns, to Christopher Jeffries and to many other innocent people
who've never sought the limelight was utterly despicable.
"It is right that we put in place a new system of press
regulation to ensure such appalling acts can never happen again. We
should do this without any further delay."Labour leader Ed Miliband said the agreement satisfied the demands of protection for victims and freedom of the press.
Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg said he hoped newspaper groups would see the logic of the deal and back it.
The charter will not be passed by MPs, but will need to be approved at the May meeting of the Queen's Privy Council - advisers to the Queen, mostly comprising senior politicians.
Meanwhile, a clause in the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Bill, which will mean that the charter cannot be amended without a two-thirds majority in Parliament, was approved in the Lords on Tuesday evening.
And a separate bill, the Crime and Courts Bill, will have amendments ensuring that newspapers who refused to join the new regulatory regime would be potentially liable for exemplary damages if a claim was upheld against them.
Brian Cathcart, Hacked Off: "An artfully crafted piece of legislation"
Mr Cameron said a press law had been avoided - although he conceded the clauses were "two very important but relatively small legislative changes" that needed to be made.
Mr Miliband said there was statute underpinning the charter, "which is actually protecting it from being changed".
BBC political editor Nick Robinson said the press had been informed over the days and months of wrangling, with key players being Telegraph's Lord Black, Associated Newspapers' Peter Wright, the editor of the Times John Witherow and the editor of the FT Lionel Barber.
'Deeply contentious' In a joint statement, the Mail and Telegraph groups, Northern and Shell, News International, the Newspaper Society and the Professional Publishers Association said the industry had not been represented in Sunday night's talks.
It said early drafts of the charter had contained "several deeply contentious issues" which had not been "resolved with the industry".
"We are not able to give any response on behalf of the industry to this afternoon's proposals until we have had time to study them," the statement concluded.
The Sun and others have previously said they would accept everything recommended by Lord Justice Leveson - except statutory legislation.
Evan Harris of campaign group Hacked Off was at the overnight talks with three other pressure group members. The group later said it believed the deal "can effectively deliver" Lord Justice Leveson's recommendations.
But the idea of a charter was criticised by free speech campaign group Index on Censorship. Chief executive Kirsty Hughes said the decision was a "sad day for press freedom in the UK".
She said: "Index is against the introduction of a royal charter that determines the details of establishing a press regulator in the UK - the involvement of politicians undermines the fundamental principle that the press holds politicians to account."
沒有留言:
張貼留言