Internal Governance Processes
The Board should require, of those who subscribe, appropriate internal governance processes, transparency on what governance processes they have in place, and notice of any failures in compliance, together with details of steps taken to deal with failures in compliance.
How was this assessed?
Response
Accepted in Part
Response
Accepted in PartThe Prime Minister stated on 29 November 2012 that he accepted "the principles that Lord Justice Leveson has laid out" for independent self-regulation, including "an independent board, a standards code, an arbitration service and the power to demand up-front, prominent apologies and impose million-pound fines." However, he rejected statutory underpinning, expressing "serious concerns and misgivings" about crossing "the Rubicon of writing elements of press regulation into the law of the land." The Royal Charter on Self-Regulation of the Press was granted on 30 October 2013, establishing the Press Recognition Panel as the recognition body. IPSO was established in September 2014 but has not sought Royal Charter recognition. IMPRESS was recognised by the PRP in October 2016. Source: https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/david-cameron-statement-in-response-to-the-leveson-inquiry-report
Published Evidence
Published assessments of implementation progress from inspectorates, select committees, official progress reports, and other sources. Check the source type badge to see whether each assessment is independent or government self-reported.
IPSO requires subscribing publications to have internal governance processes. However IPSO has conducted zero standards investigations in over 10 years of operation and upheld only 0.7% of complaints (52 out of thousands over 2018-2022). The PRP's 2024 review described IPSO as 'only the latest stage in what Lord Leveson defined as a pattern of cosmetic reform by the press.'
View detailed findings
The requirement exists on paper but IPSO's complete failure to enforce governance standards (zero investigations, 0.7% complaint upheld rate) means internal governance is not meaningfully monitored.