---

Digital Economy Bill [HL]

I still contend that that is an extrapolation. We are talking about a graduated response, but there is an assumption that somehow no one will respond positively and that everyone will carry on being a serial transgressor. Of course I cannot predict this, but we are not embarking on a campaign. The noble Earl talks about disconnections, but we do not use the term because it is not in the Bill. We have talked about possible measures to restrict bandwidth and so on. All I am asking is that we do not accept the worst-case scenarios when we have no basis for doing so. We appreciate the seriousness of what we are trying to embark on. We believe that our approach, as other noble Lords have said during this debate, is balanced and proportionate. Therefore, we do not accept the descriptions relating to heavyweight measures, a crackdown or cutting off. Neither do I accept the description of previous responses to the noble Earl as circumlocutions. We have genuinely tried to respond to concerns expressed this evening. We have said that we will write to noble Lords as regards identifying subscribers and about problems with communal provision. These are important issues. We have also said that we will address the question of a threshold, because it is an important issue. The noble Lord, Lord Lucas, said this was a probing amendment to see whether this concept could fly. We do not think that it can, but nevertheless we will address the question of a threshold. On the basis of that explanation and assurance, I hope that the noble Lord will feel able to withdraw the amendment.