The PM told the Commons: “We should, I believe, be wary of any legislation that has the potential to infringe on free speech and a free press.”
In a spooky coincidence, Leveson’s report emerged one year to the day after the Government’s Department for Business, Innovation & Skills (BIS) rejected calls from MPs for a statutory code governing the pubco/tenant relationship, favouring instead a “toughened” self-regulatory regime.
BIS said at the time: “Particularly in the current economic climate, the imposition of additional burdens on business must be considered extremely carefully. The possibility of unintended consequences, including damage to businesses, British jobs and the UK economy from even the best legislation in such an area should not be underestimated.”
These are two very different reasons to keep faith in self-regulation, but they both point to one apparent fact: this Government seems keen to do whatever it can to avoid statutory interference in the conduct of businesses (or at least it does in all areas but one — minimum pricing for alcohol — where the “possibility of unintended consequences, including damage to businesses, British jobs and the UK economy” seems to be an inconvenient truth that has certainly not dampened the Government’s enthusiasm for interfering in the conduct of business).
Self-regulation is not necessarily an easy option, and pressure can only grow on the pub trade if it is shown to be falling short of its commitments. But, to my mind, tenanted pubcos can take comfort from the fact that Government is looking for reasons not to add fresh regulatory burdens to businesses rather than excuses to do so.
A more serious fallout may be felt elsewhere. Next year is set to be an exceptionally busy one for trade lobbyists as they target breakthroughs on beer duty and VAT. Just as the Government wants reasons for not bringing forward extra legislation, it’s also eager to find reasons not to offer much-needed help on tax, so the sector could be hampered by suggestions that it still can’t get its own house in order.
The industry actually has an excellent role model to base its self-regulatory efforts on in the shape of the Portman Group. Bar the odd controversy — the naming of Kalashnikov Vodka and Charles Wells’ cocktail pre-mix Sex on the Beach spring to mind — the drinks watchdog, funded by producers, has been remarkably successful in ridding shelves and back-bars of irresponsibly-marketed alcohol.
An even more relevant example is the Responsibility Deal. Although several companies in the sector have expressed concern about some of the details, the progress achieved by the series of voluntary agreements on public health have been significant.
Events of the past few days have cemented the idea that this is a Government — or, at least, a Prime Minister — that wants to avoid the statutory route as far as possible. Depending on your perspective you may view this as a good thing or a bad thing.
And whether this translates into good headlines for the pub sector is another question entirely.