Letter: Public interest, private acts
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Sir: Some of your readers may have wondered whether a Privacy Act, such as the one I introduced in 1989, would have stopped any press investigations into Norman Lamont's financial affairs.
During its parliamentary passage, it was said that my Protection of Privacy Bill would have stopped investigations by the media. In fact, the Bill would have stopped no investigations whatsoever. Rather, it would have stopped merely the publication of non-criminal, private information so gathered (defined in the Bill as including private finances, etc), unless its publication was in the public interest, a concept that British courts have been deciding upon for almost 150 years.
While Mr Lamont's private purchase of wine may have been of considerable interest to the public, it was essentially a private matter and it would have been hard to show that its publication served the public interest in any way whatsoever. That seedy privacy invasion story would, therefore, not have been published.
However, the part payment of a minister's private legal bill, either by the taxpayer or from funds raised from the public by a political party, would obviously be considered a matter of considerable public interest. My Bill would not have hampered either its investigation or its publication.
A Privacy Bill of this type is long overdue to protect the basic human right to privacy of every citizen, which must surely be in the public interest.
Yours faithfully,
JOHN BROWNE
London, SW1
4 December
The writer was MP for Winchester, 1979-92.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments