Karen Bradley to consider 'all 選択s' on 圧力（をかける） 規則 まっただ中に 損害賠償金 関心
Culture 長官 Karen Bradley has 主張するd she will not be 急ぐd into 活動させる／戦時編成するing 規則s which could see newspapers 直面する "模範的な" 損害賠償金 if they are 告訴するd for 名誉き損 unless they 調印する up to a 明言する／公表する-支援するd system of 圧力（をかける） 規則.
The 圧力（をかける） 承認 パネル盤 (PRP) - which was 設立するd in the wake of the Leveson 調査 into 圧力（をかける） 基準s - is 予定 to 支配する on Tuesday whether to recognise Impress, a new regulator supported by 切り開く／タクシー／不正アクセスd Off 選挙運動者 Max Mosley.
If it does, Ms Bradley will have to consider whether to 活動させる／戦時編成する Section 40 of the 罪，犯罪 and 法廷，裁判所s 行為／法令／行動する 2013 which would mean that any newspaper that 辞退するd to 調印する up to the new regulator could have to 支払う／賃金 the 合法的な 料金s of a 原告，告訴人 who 告訴するd them for 名誉き損, even if the paper won the 事例／患者.
Karen Bradley was appearing before the ありふれたs Culture, マスコミ and Sport 委員会
The move has 怒り／怒るd many newspapers who have 圧倒的に 拒絶するd the idea of any form of 明言する／公表する 規則, 警告 that it would be a 脅し to 圧力（をかける） freedom.
Appearing before the ありふれたs Culture, マスコミ and Sport 委員会, Ms Bradley 定評のある that the 大多数 of newspapers were not 用意が出来ている to consider 適用するing for 承認 under the PRP, which was 設立するd by a 王室の 借り切る／憲章.
While she said she had not 支配するd out 活動させる／戦時編成するing Section 40 at some point in the 未来, she 手配中の，お尋ね者 to consider the 選択s for 達成するing "appropriate levels of 強健な 規則... outside the PRP".
She told MPs that there were 恐れるs の中で 地元の newspapers in particular that they could be 軍隊d out of 商売／仕事 if the 政府 took an 極端に "観念的な" approach to the 問題／発行する.
"In 2013 when we 審議d and passed the 行為／法令／行動する it was a different 状況／情勢. We 推定する／予想するd and hoped that the 圧力（をかける） would join regulators that 適用するd for 承認 under the PRP. That 簡単に has not happened," she said.
"I could do an 観念的な position on this but the 関わりあい／含蓄s of 存在 観念的な on this may be that we see a vibrant 解放する／自由な 地元の 圧力（をかける） 存在 影響する／感情d.
"It has been put to me very 明確に by a number of editors of 地元の newspapers that the 模範的な 損害賠償金 section of Section 40 could see them 存在 put out of 商売／仕事 and certainly would 衝撃 on their ability to do investigative journalism.
"I want to consider those re 贈呈s, consider them very carefully, and then make a 決意. I am reserving judgment at this 行う／開催する／段階 until I have had a chance to consider all the 選択s."
Newspaper organisations say they are 存在 "ゆすり，恐喝d" into joining a 政府-支援するd regulator, as those that do so would be 免除された from such 法律s.
The 産業 has 警告するd that 圧力（をかける） freedom is in 危険，危なくする, and called on 総理大臣 Theresa May to 辞退する to 器具／実施する section 40.
The Sunday Times said it would 許す an "open season for 圧力（をかける） 原告，告訴人s", 追加するing: "The 総理大臣 can 妨げる this by 辞退するing to agree to 器具／実施する section 40. She must do so."
The Sun said: "調印 up to Impress would mean 認めるing the 明言する／公表する an indirect 手渡す in what the once-解放する／自由な 圧力（をかける） could publish, when it is the 最初の／主要な 職業 of the 圧力（をかける） to 持つ／拘留する those in 力／強力にする to account."
マスコミ commentator Matthew Parris wrote in The Times and Daily Mail: "This is ゆすり，恐喝 with a 目的. The 脅し of 廃虚 is to 行為／法令／行動する as an electric プロの／賛成のd that 軍隊s every paper to 服従させる／提出する - '任意に' - to 明言する／公表する 規則."
（頭が）ひょいと動く Satchwell, (n)役員／(a)執行力のある director of the Society of Editors, said the 王室の 借り切る／憲章 system is "halfway to 明言する／公表する 支配（する）／統制する of the 圧力（をかける）" and called section 40 a "draconian 手段".
He told the 圧力（をかける） 協会: "It goes against all the 原則s of 司法（官）. The first 原則 of any 司法（官） system is that it should be fair.
"井戸／弁護士席, it's 明確に 不公平な if somebody who takes 活動／戦闘 against a paper, the paper is 設立する to have got the story 権利 and the person who 告訴するd is 全く wrong and may indeed have lied, he wouldn't 直面する any costs because the paper would have to 支払う／賃金 it. It's a nonsense."
Mr Satchwell 追加するd: "The idea that the 王室の 借り切る／憲章 system and the 承認 パネル盤 really 会合，会うs what Leveson was trying to 達成する is 明確に wide of the 示す.
"I think that's the point the 国務長官 was making when she said she's looking at the 状況／情勢, because she wants to see 強健な, voluntary, 独立した・無所属 self-規則 of the 圧力（をかける）.
"That's what the 産業 wants and that's what the 産業 has done."
Evan Harris, 共同の (n)役員／(a)執行力のある director of 切り開く／タクシー／不正アクセスd Off, which （選挙などの）運動をするs for greater 圧力（をかける） 規則, 主張するd there should be no watering 負かす／撃墜する of the Leveson 推薦s.
"The Culture 長官's suggestion that the 政府 might be 満足させるd by 圧力（をかける） self-規則 outside of the Leveson 基準 if it was, in the 政府's 見解（をとる）, '強健な enough' would be a return to the wild-west days of the failed PCC (圧力（をかける） （民事の）告訴s （売買）手数料，委託（する）／委員会／権限), and １０年間s of political-圧力（をかける） 支援する-scratching," he said.
"犠牲者s of 圧力（をかける） 乱用, most of whom are ordinary members of the public, do not have the 資源s to take the 圧力（をかける） to 法廷，裁判所, would be 存在 abandoned by the same 政治家，政治屋s who 始める，決める up the 調査.
"As long as 政治家，政治屋s and 圧力（をかける） owners are 裁判官ing 圧力（をかける） 規則, neither freedom of 表現 nor the public 利益／興味 is 安全な."
