Proceeding contribution from Lord Vaizey of Didcot (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 13 November 2008. It occurred during Adjournment debate on Internet and Video Games.
Internet and Video Games
I cannot start a conversation with the hon. Lady about that now, but I would be interested to know how she found out about that booklet. She makes the point for me. It should not be in the middle of a debate in Westminster Hall that I discover that Google has a booklet. The fact should be very prominent on Google’s website. It has links to ““Maps”” and to ““Earth””. Why can it not have a link to a site called ““protect your kids on the web””? Clicking on that link should give us the Google guide. That is what I call social responsibility. As I said, CEOP is a meaningless phrase. I only understand it because it falls into my brief. This may sound trite, but why can we not start giving organisations names that people understand, such as the internet police or other similar phrases? We need normal language. Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre is a name that has clearly been written by a lawyer. It is full of long words, and is utterly meaningless. It does not tell us what CEOP actually does. Yesterday afternoon, I typed in ““child abuse police””. The first site that I got was for the National Association of Citizens Advice Bureaux. This is an interesting point that I would like the Minister to address. When I typed in—in the vernacular, as it were—““How do I protect my kid on the internet?””, I got a range of different sites, such as ““protecteverychild””. It is at this point that one enters a potentially surreal world. How do I know that ““protecteverychild”” is a legitimate site? I have no idea who put up that site or whether it is an official site. There are numerous sites that are probably put up by concerned parents in a random way, which may give leading or misleading information. Therefore, rather than having endless reviews, I would like the Government to take the issue by the scruff of the neck and show a bit of imagination and proactivity—I know that that is a dreadful word—in finding out what kinds of sites there are. They should check the Google rankings of the official sites that are meant to give advice, and they should start to think like a mum and dad about how on earth they can get the information that they need. That leads me on to the astute comparison of safety on the internet being like safety crossing the road. I remember the green cross code man from my childhood. He was a hero in many children’s lives. Somewhere in my attic, I still have a signed photograph of the green cross code man, who later became Darth Vader. It strikes me that the Government should consider a proper public information campaign. We have one about digital Britain. The Government are not averse to using cheesy cartoon characters to get their message across. We have Digit Al telling the country how to convert to digital television. Why can we not have a public information campaign that runs year in, year out, and points mums and dads to the right places?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 482 c369-70WH
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- Westminster Hall
- Subjects
- Children Internet Pornography Young people Violence Video games
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-16 02:59:56 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_509280
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_509280
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_509280