---

Digital Economy Bill [HL]

I support the principle of a threshold, but whether it is appropriate to state the threshold here or at the point when we seriously consider the technical measures in the Bill, I am not entirely clear. In neither place at present is there a clear threshold, yet the principle, as the noble Lord, Lord Razzall, said, of introducing this legislation, is to deter or punish serial infringers. Some of the calculations in the fact sheets and impact assessments that the Government have provided must imply some level of intervention before they can make the calculation of how much it will cost and what the return to the rights holders would be, and so forth. Indeed, there is a reference, which the noble Lord, Lord Razzall, mentioned, to a threshold of 50. I am not sure whether that 50 relates to a first letter or a technical measures letter—that is, the third letter. Either way, the acceptability of the approach would be much easier for the Government if they indicated that we were talking about multiple infractions. The Government should take away the amendment and consider where it would be most appropriate to put it. There may be two different levels in the end, but it is important that the primary legislation indicates broadly the level at which the follow-through sanctions apply. If it does not, everybody will believe that such sanctions could arise with casual downloading or uploading that may not be authorised by the subscriber. If the Government accepted a threshold for the beginning of the process and of the technical measures, a lot of those concerns would be reduced if not entirely allayed. The concept of a threshold is an important one, which the Government should take seriously.