Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Whitty (Labour) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 6 January 2010. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Digital Economy Bill [HL].


Digital Economy Bill [HL]

I shall speak to the other amendments in this group as well. On reporting at least, these go to the heart of what we were discussing earlier—that the whole point of Digital Britain is to end the digital divide and digital exclusion, for both citizens and consumers in so far as there is a difference. There is a differential exclusion and extension of networks in many of the areas regulated by Ofcom. The Minister’s officials will have statistics on this. I would like to see a universal service obligation in this area, but understand some of the arguments against doing that given the range of technologies involved. I am not quite pressing that at this point, but we need to ensure that we get as close to a universal service provision as we possibly can. That has both geographical and social dimensions. On the geographical dimension, it is true, as the noble Lord, Lord Steel, implied, that the different nations of Britain have somewhat different patterns, in particular in the rurality and distance involved in many areas of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. There are similar areas in England as well, and it is important that part of the responsibility of Ofcom is to relate to the broader dimension of closing the digital divide in those parts of the United Kingdom. It is important that Ofcom has a relationship with the devolved Administrations and those administrations need to know what is going on. This in no way changes the UK dimension of the legislation but means that the resources, assets and networks that exist within the devolved nations could, jointly with Ofcom and the various digital media, be directed at closing the digital divide. It is important that those mechanisms are recognised in this Bill. The first four amendments in this group relate to a reporting relationship between Ofcom and the devolved Administrations. It is not a responsibility relationship but a reporting one, which could lead to joint work in many areas. There are those who say that if we have a non-devolved area of responsibility the regulator cannot report to the devolved Administrations; I do not believe that to be the truth. I looked quickly behind me to see if the noble Baroness, Lady Young, was here; she is a former chief executive of the Environment Agency, on whose board I sit. We operate in England and Wales; most environment legislation is UK-wide but we have to report separately to the Welsh Assembly. I am sure there are plenty of precedents among other regulators where they report to the devolved Administrations. I have had dealings with the Minister’s department on many different facets over the years—there are things they do well and things they do less well. They hardly do devolution at all. The role of the devolved Administrations needs to be reflected here. The last three amendments in this group are probably the more important in that the digital divide, digital exclusion and lack of digital literacy impact differentially among different social groups. In particular, we have the issue of rural communities. The noble Earl, Lord Erroll, has already referred to the disadvantages found by both individuals and businesses in rural areas in access to the various digital arrangements. Although it may be true that in Norwood Green people do not want too many masts, I can assure the noble Earl that in rural Wiltshire and Dorset there is a considerable demand for them so that people living there can use the services we are hoping to make available to everyone more efficiently. Even in relatively populated parts of Dorset—where I was hoping to get tonight, but will not—although we have broadband it is pretty slow compared with the urban arrangements. There needs to be due consideration for people living in rural areas and in the more deprived parts of urban areas and for small business. The other main dimension is that people who suffer from various disabilities and, to some extent, the elderly have not always been treated with full respect in relation to the new digital technologies. There is a batch of silver surfers, but there is also a batch of elderly people who are completely out of touch with various parts of the new technologies. Therefore, at least in the reporting sections, we need to do something to offset the imbalance I was fearing in Clause 1 by recognising that, in its reporting system at least, Ofcom has an obligation to identify and have regard to the interests of these various groups of disadvantaged consumers. I beg to move.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
716 c188-9 
Session
2009-10
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Disability Devolved matters Broadcasting Broadcasting reception Broadband Communication Investment Infrastructure Northern Ireland Mergers Office of Fair Trading Political impartiality Public service broadcasting Ofcom Scotland Regulation Wales Rural areas
Legislation
Digital Economy Bill (HL) 2009-10
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk