Mosley admits fascist father’s cash funds his Press regulator
A STATE-approved regulator which may be forced on the Press if draconian new libel laws are implemented is being funded by cash inherited from notorious fascist Sir Oswald Mosley, it emerged yesterday. Shamed Formula 1 tycoon Max Mosley revealed that the millions he has handed to a controversial new newspaper regulator come from a family trust handed down by his late Blackshirt father.
Mr Mosley – who was exposed by the now-defunct News of the World for taking part in a sado-masochistic orgy with prostitutes – also denied accusations that he has a ‘vendetta’ against the Press.
In an interview on BBC 1’s Sunday Politics, he was confronted by a series of extremely hostile comments about popular newspapers made by senior figures at the regulator he funds, named Impress.
Interviewer Andrew Neil showed him a series of tweets from the chief executive of Impress, Jonathan Heawood, in which he backed boycotts of titles such as the Daily Mail, the Daily Express and The Sun.
Mr Mosley continued to insist Impress was ‘completely independent’ despite being almost entirely reliant on the £3.8million he has handed over to pay for its running costs.
Culture Secretary Karen Bradley is considering whether to implement draconian libel laws that critics say would have a chilling effect on the free Press.
Section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act is opposed by all major national newspapers, who say it would make it impossible to conduct investigations such as the MPs expenses scandal and the Rotherham child abuse scandal. Local newspaper editors have warned it could force them to close. If activated by Mrs Bradley, it could make newspapers liable for the costs of both sides in libel cases, deterring them from investigating corruption and other scandals, unless they sign up to Impress, which is the only officially-approved regulator.
Most newspapers and websites, including the Daily Mail and MailOnline, are instead members of the independent regulator IPSO, which is free of State control and is funded by its members.
Questioned about where the money for Impress has come from, Mr Mosley said: ‘The money comes from a family trust. It’s family money. ’
Pressed on whether it was put together by his father, he replied: ‘Not put together by my father – my father inherited it from his father and from his father. The whole of the middle of Manchester once belonged to the family, that’s why there’s a Mosley Street in Manchester.’
He was asked whether it was ‘ironic’ that money used to regulate the Press came from the country’s ‘best known fascist’. He replied: ‘It hasn’t.’
Asked whether the anti-Press views expressed by members of the board made them ‘unfit to be impartial regulators’, Mr Mosley said he had ‘no right to criticise them’.
HOW ironic that an organisation which many believe threatens to destroy Press freedom in this country should be funded from the fortune amassed by the family of Britain’s best-known Fascist. Ex-Formula One boss Max Mosley admitted yesterday that the dubious would-be press regulator Impress is bankrolled by the trust he inherited from his father Sir Oswald – a disciple of Hitler and Mussolini, who led the British Union of Fascists in the 1930s.
Had he gained power, one of Sir Oswald’s plans was a legal ‘reform’, which would enable the state to sue newspapers and exact severe punishment. He said: ‘The freedom of the Press ... must be curtailed’.
By sponsoring Impress and backing the iniquitous Section 40 of the Crime and Courts Act, Max Mosley, too, is trying to use the law to restrict press freedom. Under Section 40, newspapers which refused to sign up to Impress would be liable to pay the legal costs of both sides in any libel action – even if they won. It’s a charter for corrupt politicians, seedy celebrities and conmen to sue, even when they know that critical stories printed about them are true.
This perversion of justice would lead to the end of investigative journalism as we know it and drive many more local papers out of business, seriously damaging democratic accountability. But submitting to Impress would be equally catastrophic. Its members make no secret of their hatred of popular newspapers, and Mr Mosley bears an allconsuming grudge after being exposed by the now-defunct News of the World as having taken part in a sado-masochistic orgy involving prostitutes.
Is it any wonder that no major publication has signed up to Impress? How could it even pretend to be impartial?
Following a consultation, Culture Secretary Karen Bradley is currently considering whether Section 40 should be activated. If she has any regard for justice, democracy and 300 years of Press freedom, the answer will be an emphatic no.