Guardian’s full statement on phone-hacking report

Full statement from The Guardian in reaction to the media select committee report on phone-hacking:

“The committee has produced an insightful and wide-ranging report, which makes positive recommendations on a number of key issues for the press.

“We welcome its findings in relation to the Guardian’s investigation of phone hacking at the News of the World, and the clear recognition that our reporting exposed new information and legitimately raised an important point of public interest. We note that the committee has come to a very different conclusion to that reached by the PCC in its own perfunctory report.

“The press has a proud record of shining a light into the darkest corners of our public institutions. As an industry we need to show we are willing to accept the same level of scrutiny and accountability. We are therefore pleased that the committee has recommended improving the self-regulatory system.

“Also encouraging are the committee’s comments on libel, excessive legal costs and super-injunctions, all of which are being used by corporations and wealthy individuals to suppress free speech both here and abroad. However, there remains a great deal of work to be done to convert concerns and recommendations into meaningful actions.

“We are surprised that News International has questioned the integrity of a cross-party committee, with a Conservative MP in the chair, carrying out an independent inquiry as is its historic parliamentary right. Observers will draw their own conclusions about why they have chosen to make this attack.

“According to the report, the MPs took a vote on only four clauses, unanimously agreeing on more than 570 paragraphs. It is insulting to the committee to question their work in this way.

“We are surprised that News International has questioned the integrity of a cross-party committee, with a Conservative MP in the chair, carrying out an independent inquiry as is its historic parliamentary right. Observers will draw their own conclusions about why they have chosen to make this attack.

“According to the report, the MPs took a vote on only four clauses, unanimously agreeing on more than 570 paragraphs. It is insulting to the committee to question their work in this way.”