My general worry when the government says it will produce a consultaion for law reform is ‘oh here we go again’.

It’s like with the law of Murder reform the Government sets terms of reference and produces consultation docs (several years of entirely sensible work and recommendations) and then eventually does almost nothing except to make it somewhat worse overall by a bit of piecemeal reform pushed by Julie Bindel and her ilk.

I just hope the rather straightforward requirement to protect freespeech for which the English have only ever been lukewarm in favour does not get high-jacked at some committe stage or more likely by Ministerial meddling completely ignoring the recommendations, or only some of them thinking that is a reasonable compromise while somehow leaving out the most critically needed aspects of reform.

Yet if the current judicially imposed privacy law were enacted into the statute law, but with the burden of proof in libel actions placed on the plaintiff, then who could object to that? And why?

Not too much interest in UK Libel Laws at HP David.

Still. I thought the article was interesting.

I am amazed at your output of what can only be described as high grade investigative journalism.

When do you get time for your actual job???

Clap.

http://www.craigmurray.org.uk/archives/2008/12/freedom_of_spee_1.html