ICO Regard for Regulatory Membership
Leveson Inquiry · An Inquiry into the Culture, Practices and Ethics of the Press · Issued 29 November 2012 · Addressed to: UK Government
Source — verbatim from the inquiry
●Inquiry recommendation
Specific provision should be made to the effect that, in considering the exercise of any of its powers in relation to the media or other publishers, the Information Commissioner's Office must have regard to the application to a data controller of any relevant system of regulation or standards enforcement which is contained in or recognised by statute.
Leveson Inquiry, An Inquiry into the Culture, Practices and Ethics of the Press · 29 Nov 2012 Source PDF →
Published evidence summary
Publicly available evidence relating to this recommendation:
- This provides a mechanism for the ICO to consider the application of relevant regulatory standards when exercising its powers in relation to the media, as recommended (Data Protection Act 2018, legislation.gov.uk).
Response — verbatim from government
●UK Government
The Prime Minister stated on 29 November 2012: "I am instinctively concerned about this proposal. There is a real danger of this recommendation being used to curb freedom of the press. We need to consider this very carefully - particularly the impact this could have on investigative journalism." The Data Protection Act 2018 retained a broad journalism exemption (Schedule 2, Part 5) and did not implement this specific recommendation. Source: https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/david-cameron-statement-in-response-to-the-leveson-inquiry-report
UK Government · 29 Nov 2012 Written response →
Evidence trail — what's actually happened since
- 23 May 2018 · UK Parliament The DPA 2018 does not require the ICO to have regard to a publisher's membership of a recognised regulatory system when considering enforcement. The connection between regulatory membership and data protection enforcement that Leveson envisioned was not implemented. View source → Not Implemented
Each entry above links to a primary source — gov.uk written statement, consultation response document, or inspection report. The Index does not characterise government intent; it tracks what has been published.
How this page is built
Source and Response are verbatim from primary documents. The Evidence trail records published activity since — written statements, consultation outcomes, inspection findings, parliamentary references. The Index does not paraphrase or characterise intent; it tracks what has been published. Where the evidence is the absence of action (a missed deadline, a slipped timetable), that absence is documented from primary sources rather than inferred.
This recommendation's data is verified periodically against primary sources. The Index is monitored for staleness weekly.