Regulation of the press must ‘err on side of freedom’

Future regulation of the press should “err on the side of freedom”, British foreign secretary William Hague has warned, before Lord Justice Leveson’s eagerly anticipated reform proposals.

Hague said he was a “big supporter of press freedom” but wanted to read the Leveson report before giving his verdict.

He dismissed suggestions that prime minister David Cameron had already made up his mind to reject state regulation, saying “none of us” had yet seen Lord Justice Leveson’s recommendations which are to be published on Thursday.

“Although I’m a big supporter of the freedom of the press, I’m also a big supporter of actually reading something before you pronounce on it,” he told BBC1’s Andrew Marr Show.

“We will have to do that, but in my case, from the philosophical viewpoint that you have to err on the side of freedom.”

Downing Street said Cameron was keeping an open mind and would make no decisions before he has seen the report arising from the inquiry he set up in the wake of last year’s phone- hacking scandal.

The Mail on Sunday reported that Cameron would back a new, tougher model of self-regulation to replace the Press Complaints Commission, but with the threat that a statutory system could be brought in later if matters do not improve.

“The prime minister is open-minded about Lord Justice Leveson’s report and will read it in full before he makes any decision about what to do,” a Downing Street spokesman said.

Cameron will have access to it on Wednesday so he can make a substantive response when it is released.

He faces a tricky dilemma balancing the demands of victims of press intrusion for tighter controls without alienating media and cabinet members who have signalled opposition to statutory regulation.

London mayor Boris Johnson warned against a move towards having newspapers “controlled by politicians”. Speaking from India, he told Sky News’s Murnaghan: “There needs to be a tougher system of self-regulation. Where I think we don’t want to go is in the direction of a media that is controlled by politicians.

“That would be completely the opposite direction for instance of India where I am at the moment, where among the many attractions of this wonderful country is that they have a dynamic, vibrant, and free and critical media.”