Decision of the Complaints Committee 00673-15 Colley v The People
1. Kevin Colley complained to the Independent Press
Standards Organisation that The People had breached Clause 1 (Accuracy) of the
Editors’ Code of Practice in an article headlined “Crackdown on deadbeat dads
pays off as Child Support Agency collects record £1.2 billion in maintenance”,
published on 24 January 2015.
2. The article reported that “a crackdown on absent dads”
had resulted in “9 in 10 dads” who did not live with their children paying
child maintenance.
3. The complainant said the description of fathers who
had paid maintenance through the Child Support Agency as “deadbeats” was
offensive and inaccurate. It was not only fathers who paid through the CSA;
there were also mothers in the system, some of whom had arrears or chose not
pay. Furthermore, not all fathers who paid through the CSA had been forced to
do so.
4. The complainant said the piece had made no mention of
the fact that many fathers were owed money for overpayment of maintenance or
were paying maintenance but were not legally required to do so. It also failed
to state that many mothers made fraudulent claims.
5. He expressed further concern that the article stated
that 184,000 Deduction from Earnings Orders were in place, but had not stated
how many DEOs were issued for non-compliance. There was no mention of how much
of the £330 million collected from wages accounted for false arrears.
6. The complainant expressed concern that the newspaper
only published articles about the CSA that stigmatised fathers.
7. The newspaper did not accept a breach of the Code. It
said the article had been based on a press release issued by the Department for
Work and Pensions. The article had referred to fathers because research
published by the Centre for Social Justice had shown that 92% of single parents
living at home were mothers.
Relevant Code Provisions
8. Clause 1 Accuracy
i) The Press must take care not to publish inaccurate,
misleading or distorted information, including pictures.
ii) A significant inaccuracy, misleading statement or
distortion once recognised must be corrected, promptly and with due prominence,
and - where appropriate - an apology published. In cases involving the
Regulator, prominence should be agreed with the Regulator in advance.
Findings of the Committee
9. The Committee acknowledged that the DWP press release,
upon which the article had been based, had referred to increased numbers of
“parents” paying child maintenance, not “fathers”. The newspaper, however, had
based its interpretation of the press release on research carried out by the
Centre of Social Justice, which indicated that 92% of lone parents with
dependent children were women. The newspaper’s reference to “fathers” had
therefore not been significantly misleading, and the Committee was satisfied
that sufficient care had been taken over the article’s accuracy. There was no
breach of Clause 1 on this point.
10. The Committee noted the complainant’s objection to
the newspaper calling non-resident parents who paid through the CSA “deadbeat
dads”, as not all fathers who paid through the CSA had been forced to do so.
However, this was clearly a reference to those who had not been paying child
maintenance due, but were now paying as a result of tougher enforcement. It was
the newspaper’s depiction of those who “fail to pay”, as made clear in the
article’s introduction. The reference did not amount to a factual statement
that all parents paying child maintenance through the CSA were “deadbeats”. The
fact the complainant had found this comment offensive was not a matter for
consideration under the Code.
11. The complainant had raised a number of concerns about
the omission of information regarding other child maintenance issues and
potential failings of the CSA. However, this article had focused on the effect
of a CSA crackdown on unpaid child maintenance; the newspaper was not obliged
to discuss wider issues facing the system and the absence of such detail had
not rendered the piece misleading. There was no breach of the Code on this
point.
Conclusions
12. The complaint was not upheld.
Remedial Action Required
N/A
Date complaint received: 12/02/2015
Date decision issued: 08/04/2015
The Independent Press Standards Organisation C.I.C. is a Community Interest Company limited by guarantee and registered in England and Wales with registered number 02538908.
