AddThis SmartLayers

Peers to probe use of regional press by government

Three leading regional political journalists are to give evidence this week to a major inquiry into government communications.

The trio will be quizzed by peers over whether the government’s relationship with the regional media has improved since a mildly critical report in 2004.

Four years ago, the Phillis Review of government communications called on the government to make more use of the regional press.

The House of Lords Communications Committee is now carrying out an inquiry into how far, if at all, the recommendations of the Phillis Review have been carried out.

Giving evidence at Wednesday’s session will be Bob Ledwidge, editor of regional political programmes for the BBC, David Ottewell, chief reporter at the Manchester Evening News, and Chris Fisher, political editor of the Eastern Daily Press

“They will be asked about how Government communication activities target the regional media and whether this has improved since 2004,” said a spokesman for the Committee.

The Newspaper Society has also submitted evidence to the inquiry, saying it has found it “increasingly necessary” to remind politicians of the importance of the regional media.

“It is important that the Government Communications Service continues to appreciate the strengths of the regional media and values the contribution that it can make in communicating and engaging with the public at local and regional level,” says the NS in its submission.

“We have found it increasingly necessary to remind politicians, government departments and their communications services of the importance and effectiveness of the independent local and regional media’s editorial and advertising content.

“Various policy papers suggest that government and public bodies should develop and rely upon their own communications channels rather than the independent media. There is seldom any evidence to support this assertion, other than a suggestion of possible costs savings. Little consideration is given to the consequences for democratic debate.”