The House of Lords has once again voted to establish a fresh Leveson-style public inquiry into the conduct of the media, overturning a decision made by MPs last week and setting up another showdown with the government.

Peers voted by 252 to 213 on Monday evening to back an amendment that called for a full investigation into unlawful conduct by newspapers, misuse of data by social media companies, and relations between the press and the police.

“It’s an inquiry into criminality, corruption and abuse,” said Lady Hollins, a crossbench who moved the amendment, justifying the decision to reject the House of Commons’ verdict. “In any other industry the press would be demanding an inquiry. And yet their opposition is uniform.”

Last week MPs narrowly voted against establishing such an inquiry after a strong whipping operation by ministers and concessions to Northern Ireland’s Democratic Unionist party. The government says a new inquiry would cost too much and would not reflect the changing media industry.

The House of Lords’ decision means MPs will now be forced to vote on the issue for the second time in a week, as the legislation is in ping-pong mode, which sees amendments bounce between both Houses of Parliament. Supporters of press regulation are hopeful that they can convince a handful of wavering MPs to switch sides when the lower chamber debates the legislation on Tuesday.

Lord Justice Leveson during the first phone-hacking inquiry. Photograph: Sean Dempsey/PA

Lady Hollins insisted the Lords were justified in overturning the decision made by MPs since many of the arguments made in the House of Commons against the new inquiry were misleading, while the government had disappointed the victims of phone hacking when it decided not to hold the second part of the Leveson inquiry.



She said she adjusted the proposed legislation to specifically exclude local newspapers from the inquiry, which had been one complaint made by MPs.

Several peers used the debate to make specific complaints about the treatment they have received from the media.

John Prescott used parliamentary privilege to directly accuse the Times editor John Witherow of lying to the Leveson inquiry, following the revelations from the whistleblower John Ford, who claimed he was employed during Witherow’s tenure on the Sunday Times to blag bank records.

“Mr Witherow, you appear to be a liar,” said Lord Prescott, the former Labour deputy prime minister. “I know there are strong words here, but you didn’t tell the truth, and you did pay the money and you did commit criminal acts against people, breaching their human rights. That surely, in any democracy, is wrong.” News UK, the Times’s publisher, has denied retaining or commissioning any individual to act illegally.

Michael Grade, a former chairman of the BBC, warned that the inquiry was another attempt to restrict the activities of the British press. “I suspect what lies behind this amendment is yet another attempt to exercise some statutory controls or levers over our free media. Any inquiry is bound to produce recommendations with the risk to free speech of some statutory device, overt or covert, buried in the recommendations,” Lord Grade said.

Earl Attlee, a supporter of a new public inquiry, said it was the “last roll of the dice” for the plan, suggesting peers are unlikely to overturn the decision of MPs again.

Conservative Richard Keen, justifying the government’s position, urged peers to respect the will of the House of Commons: “What is being proposed is an extensive inquiry into the past when we’re addressing a bill that is determined to look to the future.”