A Free Press is Vital, Just Put It on a Leash

As the Leveson enquiry approaches the finish line, I feel somewhat obligated to underline the importance of the free press to Britain and throughout the world. The free press, when acting out the role is it designed to do, holds government accountable for their actions, keeps MPs on their toes and forces companies into more ethical procedures all round. The enquiry was commissioned to seek out whether the press should be regulated or censored in the future, to avoid further incidents such as the phone hacking scandal that has engulfed the entire news media in 2011 and still today.

The current body in charge of regulating the British press is known as the Press Complaints Commission (PCC), which of course contains several editors of national newspapers. Therefore, it is essentially a system of self regulation in which a few of the ‘old boys’ get together over some extortionately-priced whisky to discuss what celebrity is going to get their mobile phone hacked next.   

This is not good enough for the British general public. It is unacceptable and it needs to change. What I propose, and it seems many are in agreement with this view, is a total disbanding and abolishment of the PCC and to replace it with a government funded (but independent of the government) Ofcom-type institution. This institution would investigate complaints from the public but it would also watch over the press to make sure that its ‘house is in order’ and to maintain the type of standards that brought it to the forefront of journalism in the first place.

It is not to say that recently the press have not produced some magnificent pieces of journalism. In 2009, The Telegraph exposed the MPs expenses scandal that led to politicians such as the Conservative Peter Viggers being sacked for claiming a £30,000 duck island in his garden with taxpayers’ money. Furthermore, the News of the World unravelled the corruption that was occurring within the Pakistan cricket team in a test series against England in the summer of 2010, culminating in four players receiving prison sentences.

So, if we were able to combine the type of excellent journalism that I have spoken about above, and then with proper regulation, constrict the type of illegal methods used to gain information, there is the potential for our press to reach the heights that made it so prestigious in the beginning. But we must resist calls for government regulation or any type of censorship. A free press is vital for the future democracy of Britain. It cannot be influenced by marketing and advertisers and it must not be influenced by the government. We live in a country whereby government propaganda is not entirely pertinent, and it must continue to stay that way. Or we as citizens will inadvertently lose the very rights we pride ourselves in having. 

Tory’s NHS reforms going in the right direction?

David Cameron with Health Secretary Andrew Lansley (right)

As a fully-paid Conservative member it pains me to say that I do not agree with their plans to completely overhaul the NHS. I do agree that the NHS needs to be reviewed and reforms need to be made, but The Health and Social Care Bill, in my opinion, is not the answer.

The Bill will see large amounts of public sector work being transferred to the private sector, and alarmingly, allowing GPs themselves to manage their own budgets and to decide treatments accordingly. The idea of such a notion is to remove the vast amounts of bureaucracy that clog up the NHS, wasting its already crippled budget on needless layering, with managers being paid a lot to do a little – an idea that is welcomed among many citizens, including myself.

But I’m not so sure that allowing the GPs to manage their own budgets is the answer. The government have made assurances that doctors will never feel the need to choose cheaper, less effective treatments for patients, to crunch the numbers. Yet, how can they guarantee this? If I’m a GP and one treatment will force me over my budget for the month, whilst the alternative (which of course isn’t as good) will allow me to stay on target, which one am I going to choose?! It’s obvious.

Furthermore, no mention has been made of any changes to the training that GPs and medical students will receive to actually implement these changes. Are the doctors going to be taught basic accountancy skills? Is basic accountancy going to have to be added to an already demanding seven-year long degree course to become a doctor?

If the government want long-term plans to save money with the NHS, they need to think bigger than this. They need to think of more effective ways of increasing the efficiency of every aspect of the institution, not just budget control. They need to consider easier ways of making appointments, more drop-in clinics, more contact time with patients to avoid mistaken diagnoses which are becoming all too common. Now I’m not going to sit here and ‘GP bash’ because it is far too common, it’s unfair and it’s unproductive. But it has to be said, if the government want productivity improved, they need to make sure their doctors get off of Google when making their diagnosis and actually focus on the patient themselves.

Health Secretary Andrew Lansley says that the unions criticising these plans, namely the Royal College of Nursing and the Royal College of Midwives, are an example of them just “want[ing] to have a go at the government”. I think there might be a little bit more to it than that Andrew!

Improving the efficiency of the NHS isn’t just based on crunching the numbers and reducing the deficit (although of course being a Tory, deficit reduction is one of my main economic policy beliefs), it’s about actually improving the care and treatment that patients receive. I hope the government doesn’t forget such a simple fact.   

  

Fergie: To buy or not to buy?

Sir Alex Ferguson shocked us all just over a week ago with the announcement of Paul Scholes coming out of retirement, as Manchester United’s solitary signing so far in this January transfer window – a move that has left some United fans excited, whilst leaving others scratching their heads.

The previous summer was marked by the Red Devils by making three major signings in the mould of Ashley Young, Phil Jones and David de Gea at a cost of around £50million. Although, the major debate surrounding the club was not so much about the players they had acquired, it was the one they had not, namely the creative midfield player - Inter Milan’s Wesley Sneijder.

Fergie’s logic was clear: The young Tom Cleverley is the future of the club and spending £30million+ on a 27 year old is not part of the long term plans. However, after being propelled straight into the first-team, and a blistering start to the season, Cleverley has found himself on the sidelines as a long term injury absentee. And it must be said, United’s midfield has been lacking something ever since.

We now find ourselves in the January transfer window; a time when Sir Alex has previously warned fans that he will not do business that doesn’t represent good value for the club. And the news travels that Paul Scholes has signed a deal that will see him play for the club until the end of the season, revealing he missed football after retiring in the summer of 2011.

So what does this deal represent for United? A lack of money to spend? A failure to attract the talent required? Probably a bit of both. It is common knowledge that the red side of Manchester are no longer the club with the largest financial clout in the Premier League. But it is clear there is money to be spent when the right player at the right age can be found.

So don’t be surprised if this summer, Manchester United spend big money on a creative central midfield player. But also don’t be surprised if he’s not yet the finished product. Because United have one advantage over many of their rivals, a vast scouting network that can uncover gems like Javier Hernandez for £6million. Because of United’s financial situation, resale value is now crucial for every player they sign. Young players like Chris Smalling and Phil Jones, purchased for a combined value of £28million, will be worth that each in a few years to come – the long term game is the one United play now, one that requires patience from fans. Especially at the current time, when the squad are clearly in transition, and a changing of the ‘old guard’ is taking place.   

But for any worried United fans, the future is bright, and they will continue to attract young, talented players – just beware that Barcelona and Real Madrid will be watching them; although another £80million or so doesn’t sound so bad does it..?