Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Howard of Rising (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Monday, 18 January 2010. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Digital Economy Bill [HL].


Digital Economy Bill [HL]

Before the noble Lord rises to withdraw, or not, his amendment, the Minister cited a time period of three months and one of one month. From where did the Minister get the figure of one month? Would that be adequate time for internet service providers to set up their system? It seems to me to be quite a short period to get a system properly set up, running and tested. We all—not least the Government—have seen how difficult it is sometimes to introduce systems that work from day one, or even to get them introduced at all. You have only to think about organisations such as the National Health Service to realise the sort of problems that can arise. The Minister said that he thought that the amendment was unnecessary. One thing that is unnecessary is the element of retrospective legislation. As I said, it is unattractive at the best of times. Whatever merits there may be to the Minister's answers, that is an ultimate stumbling block.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
716 c842 
Session
2009-10
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Access Data protection Codes of practice Appeals Broadcasting Costs Computer networks Copyright Digital broadcasting Broadband Communication Fraud ICT Exemptions Intellectual property Libraries Internet Educational institutions Ofcom Radio frequencies Schools Subscriptions Internet service providers
Legislation
Digital Economy Bill (HL) 2009-10
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk