Privacy law, free press or self-regulation?

What many don't understand is that the UK does, in fact, have a free press - and it self-regulates - where applicable. Yet the PCC [Press Complaints Commission] doesn't have any real teeth - none at all. So, while there is self-regulation there really isn't. And, even though many people ignore the wire-tapping case that is floating around, it is a matter of morality and law.

Why should a free press simply ignore the law of the land in chasing a scoop - not on the scale of Watergate - but about the name, say, of any given celebrity - who the Deputy Prime Minister has been speaking to or, indeed, what messages a PR guru has?

I keep coming back to this because while I want a free press - and I don't want a privacy law that will cripple real investitagive journalism, the ramifications of one, extremely powerful individual and his empire could bring about that privacy law that will, in turn, criminalise more of what the press do.

The right-wing press are simply saying that this case was years ago - why keep on about it, what has Andy Coulson done while in the employ of the Tories) to deserve this? What is it, politically? It is just a matter that the left are bleating to get him to resign because he is doing such a sterling job while in that employment.

But is that the case?

It shows that the Westminster village really is as out of touch as many have suspected for a long, long time. Rather than laws to criminalise what you can put in your garbage bin or which school your child can go to the government should have seen things like this coming. And, if necessary legislated about that - yet the proprietor of an empire has the ear of Prime Ministers through a network that we, ordinary Joe's, don't have access to.

Even Prime Ministers in waiting if you are to believe what the polls have to say - and the direct access is through a short string - Andy Coulson was the editor of The News of the World and is now the director of communications for David Cameron - the owner of NotW is Rupert Murdoch. As we know the influence of Murdoch runs deep - kow-towing to him can bring him on-board and that can, statistically, bring about a victory in a general election.

We have seen that the Tories will take away the bite of one government body, OfCom because OfCom wants Sky (Murdoch) to share a certain amount of its content. Murdoch wants the BBC to be made much smaller or, at the very most disbanded which will then leave a gaping hole open in UK broadcasting that will lay way to Sky filling that gap and flushing millions of pounds in News Group, News International and the Murdoch empire once again.

With a free press there has to come with it great, great responsibility - and that will mean the self-regulation of the press must have some teeth - yet while weak ministers are brunching with the press for political favour this isn't going to happen.

And with that MPs, Ministers and, indeed, Parliament will take their eye off what is more important - as I feel they have done now, and that is the voting public. If the electorate feels it is being ignored it will, under the right circumstances say "Enough" and elect someone who will do something about the press, those that own the press and privacy. Add to that those same electorate are watching what is going on, listening and, from what I see and read - are getting ready to give UK politicians a bloody nose.