MEDIA RIGHTS
PARLIAMENT AND THE MEDIA
Examining Canada’s self-governing model of media accountability
The Hon. Linda Reid, MLA has served as Speaker of the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia since her election to the position in June 2013. Previously, she served as Deputy Speaker from 2009 to 2013. Ms. Reid served as Minister responsible for early childhood development and child care. First elected as a Member of BC’s Legislative Assembly in 1991, Ms. Reid is British Columbia’s longest serving current MLA.
Media coverage of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association conference on Parliament and the Media included the following headline in the Times of India newspaper: Parliamentarians, media must be accountable for conduct. The article reported that, in the view of delegates to the conference, Members of Parliament and the media should be held accountable for their conduct and need to work responsibly to ensure that democratic institutions flourish. This was indeed the
consensus we reached at this significant CPA conference that I was privileged to attend in Andhra Pradesh, India from 8 to 10 April 2015. It is an important statement. If our parliamentary democracies are to endure, we need to ensure the accountability of both Parliament and the media. With the 800th
anniversary
of the sealing of the Magna Carta this year, it is opportune to reflect on what steps we can take today to honour and preserve our parliamentary democracies. Most would agree that efforts that would promote greater accountability of Parliamentarians and the media should be one of those laudable steps.
Accountability of Parliament Accountability is the hallmark of a parliamentary democracy. In any free and democratic society, citizens must have the ability to hold their government to account. In order to do so, citizens must be informed. As stated in the Statement of Principles of one of Canada’s
106 | The Parliamentarian | 2015: Issue Two
leading newspapers, the Toronto Star: “An informed public is essential to fostering and preserving Canada’s democratic society”.
A free press informs citizens by gathering and communicating information to citizens about public policy issues and actions taken by government. It performs this vital role without government interference. The principle of freedom of expression, and freedom of the press in particular, is essential to the working of a parliamentary democracy. The media are conduits for information about the work of Parliament as well as critics of Parliament and individual Parliamentarians. In recognition of the role of the media, many Parliaments provide facilities and support within their precincts to legislative press galleries. Their independence is reflected in the fact that legislative press galleries determine their own membership. The work of members of the press gallery is integrated into the daily operations of the Legislature and working relationships are maintained with Parliamentarians.
Transparency is an important component of accountability. Parliaments are taking new measures to promote greater transparency. In the British Columbia Legislature, for example, receipts for the travel expenses of Members are now posted online on the Legislature’s website.
Accountability of the Media Media accountability is also critical in a democratic society.
In a 2009 decision of the Supreme Court of Canada involving a newspaper, the Chief Justice discussed freedom of expression and stated that: “Freedom does not negate responsibility. It is vital that the media act responsibly in reporting facts on matters of public concern, holding themselves to the highest journalistic standards.” Given the importance and influence of the media, it is essential that journalists be accountable for how they perform their role. News stories and commentary must be accurate, balanced and fair. The damaging and far-
reaching harm to the reputations of individuals that results from unfair personal attacks is well recognized. Damaging and far- reaching harm to democratic institutions also ensues from unethical and irresponsible reporting about their activities. Defamation laws permit individuals to bring a civil action for damages for reputational harm. Recourse to the courts is always, however, a costly and lengthy process.
At the CPA conference, delegates discussed alternative ways in which the media can be held accountable. We considered regulatory models in different jurisdictions and leading practices.
In India, there is a statutory, quasi-judicial national authority that functions as a watchdog of the press. It adjudicates complaints against and by the press for violation of ethics and for violation of the freedom of the
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76