“I believe that the whole political system has failed in this,” declared Chris Bryant during the emergency debate in July on phone hacking. This speech was the culmination of years of campaigning for the Labour MP, who has long been determined that illegal practices in journalism shouldn’t be beyond the reach of the law.
While the majority of the nation may have only been properly aware of the phone-hacking scandal for the past couple of months, it has been on Bryant’s mind for years. Now that Parliament has picked up the issue, there are urgent lessons that must be learned, Bryant says.
“I hate it when people say, ‘Oh, Parliament have been wonderful during this.’ You could say, rather, it’s been awful, because for the previous eight years nothing’s happened.
“Parliament was lied to for years. We have to sit down – no one else can do this for us – and decide whether all witnesses for select committees should be required to attend, like in a court, and whether they should all have to give evidence under oath so that if they’ve lied, they’ve committed a criminal offence. We can’t rest on our laurels on this. We’ve got to change our parliamentary process.”
For him, it all started in 2003, when, as part of a select committee inquiry into privacy and media intrusion, he asked Rebekah Brooks (then Wade), chief executive of News International and former editor of the News of the World, whether she had ever paid the police for information. She replied that she had.
Even when he suspected that his own phone had been hacked – a suspicion that was confirmed by the Metropolitan Police in January 2010 – this wasn’t a personal crusade for Bryant. He is motivated, he says, by a desire to preserve the best elements of the UK’s free press.
“I believe in good, investigative journalism,” he says. “I just want the various media to do it with decency, with honesty, certainly with courage, but also within the law.”
The potential for personal ramifications from this kind of campaign have been a major deterrent to others – as Bryant puts it: “Nobody really wanted to shake the Murdoch tree in case all the apples fell on their head.” He’s quite open about the fact that, as a result of his actions, “the Murdoch empire’s had its fair chunk of my flesh”.
Bryant’s personal involvement in the matter actually aided, rather than hindered, his campaign, he believes. “It meant that I had a means of forcing it all out into the open. It’s the civil cases, by Sienna Miller and others, that have forced the police to do a full and proper investigation. So, in a sense, because I was involved in that as well, I could do the judicial review against the Met and the action against News International.”
Bryant was not alone in his efforts. Fellow Labour MP Tom Watson has also been determined to bring the matter to the attention of the wider public. But just because they’re united in their desire for proper parliamentary scrutiny doesn’t mean that the two are natural allies, Bryant admits.
“It’s a slightly unusual team. We’re slightly different personality types, but we’ve [worked] very much closely together, ever since Tom’s been on the committee campaigning on this.”
Their efforts have provoked different reactions from their parliamentary colleagues: “A lot of the older intake, the older lags, weren’t very interested in this story, but quite a lot of the new intake were, and people want to see change.”
Allies elsewhere in the chamber helped too. Bryant says that the role played by Speaker John Bercow, in granting emergency debates and Urgent Questions on the matter, was vital.
“The previous Speaker wouldn’t have done. It was important, because it was the only way we could get it onto the floor of the House, and the government wasn’t going to allow that.”
From the editor:
For his sustained and dogged campaign to subject the practices used at News International, and in the media more generally, to parliamentary scrutiny, Chris Bryant is our MP of the Month. Since the expenses scandal, public faith in Parliament has been low, and MPs have struggled to convince the public that they are working in their best interests. But the efforts of Bryant, Watson and others to shine the spotlight on the relationship between politicians, newspapers and private investigators have gone a long way towards repairing this relationship, and have flagged up areas where Parliament can be reformed to ensure that a matter like this never flies under the radar for so long again.
Ben Duckworth
Honourable mentions
Graham Evans - Conservative MP for Weaver Vale
Graham Evans was nominated for his ongoing campaign to reform early-day motions (EDMs). There have been roughly 1,756 EDMs tabled since last May. But very few EDMs even make it to the chamber to be debated, and cost roughly £290 per EDM. Last year, Evans took the unusual step of tabling an EDM that called for EDMs to be abolished. It was signed by 25 MPs and caused a torrent of media attention. He explains: “Given that in the last year we had a spending review, it is only right that we take some time to reflect on the cost effectiveness and value of EDMs, which now cost us around £1m a year.” Graham is currently attempting to get the procedure committee to review Parliament’s use of EDMs, and is also seeking to secure a debate on the subject via the backbench business committee.
Helen Jones - Labour MP for Warrington North
Helen Jones receives an honourable mention for a speech she recently gave about Private Gary Barlow, who was killed on duty in Northern Ireland on 4 March, 1973, aged 19. Jones told the chamber: “There may be those who wonder why a case that is now nearly 40 years old should be debated on the floor of the House. My answer is simple: it is about justice for Gary, for his family and for the people who tried to save him. Not only was Gary Barlow tragically killed, but his bravery was never properly recognised and his family suffered, and continues to suffer...” As one MP who nominated her said: “Helen spoke beautifully and movingly”, and that Private Barlow’s family had greatly appreciated the recognition.
Harriett Baldwin - Conservative MP for West Worcestershire
Harriett was nominated for her work on her Independent Financial Advisers campaign. Described by a fellow MP as “tremendous” with “huge local and national interest”, it is a fine example of an MP using a specialism to further an issue in Parliament – she worked for an investment bank for over 20 years. She began her campaign in a Westminster Hall debate last October, and then a backbench business debate in the main chamber in November. Recently the Treasury select committee published a report, in which MPs called for higher professional standards on IFAs. Harriett continues to campaign, especially on the Financial Service Authority’s news that up to 10,000 jobs – in many cases, those of small, independent financial advisers – could be lost.
Comments
Be the first to comment on this article!