Leveson 2 and the price of silence: why media reform still matters

Thirteen years after the Leveson Report laid bare the systemic failures of press standards in the UK, a group of more than 30 citizens, including Gerry and Kate McCann, have written to the Prime Minister calling for the second part of the Leveson inquiry to be revived. Their request is simple: meet us, listen to us and take action.

For the McCanns, whose daughter Madeleine went missing in 2007, time has not alleviated the impact of media intrusion. Talking on BBC Radio Four’s Today programme, Gerry McCann talked about how “monstering” by sections of the press had made him feel as if he was being “suffocated and buried”.

In their letter to Sir Keir Starmer, sent earlier this month, they argue that successive governments have failed to complete the reforms recommended by Lord Justice Leveson, leaving the public exposed to the same unethical practices that caused harm more than a decade ago.

The McCanns are not alone in making that case. The letter is also signed by Margaret Aspinall, whose son James was killed in the Hillsborough disaster, Christine Flack, mother of the late television presenter Caroline Flack and Paul Dadge, a survivor of the 7/7 London bombings.

None of the signatories present themselves as public figures. Instead, they describe themselves as “British citizens” who have experienced first-hand the “distress and trauma” of intrusive reporting, and a regulatory system they believe still fails to offer meaningful protection.

The original Leveson Inquiry was established in the wake of the phone hacking scandal to examine the culture, practices and ethics of the press. Its first report, published in 2012, exposed widespread wrongdoing and recommended a new system of independent regulation, underpinned by statute.

While some changes followed, the second phase of the inquiry – commonly known as Leveson 2 – was intended to examine the full extent of unlawful behaviour, failures in corporate governance and the relationship between media organisations, politicians and the police. That phase was later abandoned by Theresa May’s government in 2018.

Supporters of Leveson 2 argue that this decision left a critical gap. Without it, there has been no comprehensive assessment of whether or not major publishers genuinely changed their practices. In their letter, the signatories point out that many of the same publishers remain members of IPSO (Independent Press Standards Organisation), a regulator they fund and control. As Lord Justice Leveson himself warned, this risks allowing the press to continue to “mark their own homework”.

The human cost of that failure is laid bare in Christine Flack’s contribution. She argues that “The Sun and other newspapers made life unbearable for Caroline” and adds that more people suffer every day because media companies are “so powerful that even the Government is too frightened to stand up to them”.

Gerry McCann is more direct still. He says victims were “repeatedly promised” that a future Labour government would introduce Leveson reforms on press standards, yet argues that, since coming to power, there has been no sign those commitments will be honoured. In his view, political leaders have prioritised the support of national newspapers over the public interest – a “serious failure of political courage”.

The media is often called the ‘Fourth Estate’. We trust it to act as a public watchdog and hold power to account. We expect fairness, transparency and decency from institutions that wield influence.  So, when sections of the press are perceived as harmful, abusive even, and acting with impunity, that trust erodes. And once damaged, it is difficult to restore.

The signatories themselves are careful to stress that their call is not an “attack on journalism” itself. On the contrary, it is a “defence of ethical and professional standards in journalism”. Failing to act on press reform represents not just a political lapse, but a betrayal of the basic principles that underpin public confidence in democratic institutions.

As Paul Dadge argues: “The lack of action on press reform by our Prime Minister is a profound betrayal—not only of those of us who have suffered press intrusion, but of the guiding principles of the Labour Party: fairness, accountability, integrity, and social justice. These principles are not optional—they are the foundation of trust between the party and the people it serves.”

For a government elected on promises of decency and accountability, listening to victims and completing the work begun more than a decade ago would send a clear signal that no institution is beyond scrutiny and that media reform still matters.

This column appeared in the Western Mail on 29 December 2025 and was written by our director, Carolyn Pugsley.