There are many who argue that 1997 was a defining year for the self regulation of the press.

That it was a dramatic - and tragic - year is not in doubt. Whether or not criminal investigations in France ever show the paparazzi to have played a hand in the dreadful events in Paris, the death of Diana, Princess of Wales clearly touched a raw nerve among members of the public about the way in which newspapers and magazines gather news.

It was essential that the newspaper industry responded to those concerns and acted upon them. It did so with commendable vigour and speed - demonstrating once again two of the main strengths of self regulation: its ability to adapt, and to do so without the cumbersome paraphernalia of statute. Less than twelve weeks after the death of the Princess, a new and much tougher Code of Practice had been drafted,agreed by newspaper and magazine publishers and ratified by the PCC. The changes to the Code are outlined in detail in this Report.

It may be that this was a defining moment. Yet I prefer to think of 1997 as a year of evolution - not revolution. It was a year in which self regulation built on its strengths and continued to develop the way in which it serves the public.

In a year, therefore, of high profile events, we made progress in less dramatic - but nonetheless important - ways. That we were able to do so is the result of two factors. The first has been the unstinting support of the newspaper and magazine publishing industry - which remains strongly committed to tough and effective self regulation. The second has been the informal and flexible way in which we conduct our business. Unencumbered by statute, we can resolve complaints quickly and effectively to the advantage of those in dispute with a newspaper or magazine.

Against that background, 1997 was also a year in which the spectre of legislation again threatened self regulation.

The implementation of the EU Directive on Data Protection and the incorporation into UK law of the European Convention on Human Rights both posed serious threats to the work of the PCC and to the freedom of the press.

On both these issues, the Government - to its great credit - has listened to our concerns and those of the newspaper industry, and acted. Although at the time of this Report's publication, drafting of the amendment to the Human Rights Bill is still in progress, it is my belief that neither of these pieces of legislation will establish a privacy regime that would have undermined self regulation and threatened free expression.

But that does not mean, as I have said before, that we can simply rest here and pitch our tents. I have always believed - and I feel it in my bones - that self regulation works far better than any alternative could. But that belief is, in many ways, destined to be a uniquely personal one: I alone know of stories that never see the light of day because of the strictures of the Code; and I alone see at first hand the way editors respect its terms and the authority of the Commission. Yet the public will inevitably remain sceptical. I therefore believe we have two central tasks ahead in 1998.

First, we can and will do more to improve still further our service to members of the public. We will carry on seeking to resolve as many disputes as possible, and to do so as quickly as possible.

Second - and perhaps most importantly - we must try to demonstrate that the new, tough Code which editors themselves put into place in 1997 actually works in delivering the standards of ethical journalism that the public rightly expects.

I am confident that self regulation, now entering its eighth year, is equal to both these tasks.

The Rt Hon Lord Wakeham has been Chairman of the Press Complaints Commission since 1995. A former Chief Whip and leader of both Houses of Parliament, he holds a number of other posts including the Chancellorship of Brunel University and the Chairmanship of Vosper Thorneycroft plc, and Kalon Group plc.

We resolved more complaints than ever before - fulfilling the Commission's main task of conciliating disputes. We also did so more quickly than ever. It took an average of just four days to resolve a complaint in 1997 - a speed which the law or any statutory system could never match.

We continued to improve the efficiency with which we deal with complaints under the terms of our Complainants' Charter. As a result, by the end of the year, a record number of the complaints we received - some 77% - had been completed within twelve weeks. We aim to improve this still further in 1998.

We continued to improve and tighten the Code even before the events in Paris. Many of the Code changes ratified in November 1997 dealt with areas on which the Commission had been working throughout the year - including the treatment of children in the public eye, discrimination on grounds of mental illness and the problem of the 'media scrum'.