---

Digital Economy Bill [HL]

My Lords, the amendment would ensure that there was a clear separation between any body appointed to administer and enforce the code and the industry parties that will need to abide by the code, with the implication that "sufficient" independence is not, well, sufficient. I understand the thought behind the amendment, since the independence of any body that is administering and enforcing the code must be clear; I endorse the concern of the noble Lord, Lord De Mauley, about it not being susceptible to undue pressure. However the amendment is not necessary to achieve that result. The noble Lord, Lord Clement-Jones, accused us of being shadowy and weaselly. I have to reject that; I am deeply hurt. In response to his anatomical analogy, we will not be operating by rule of thumb. However, we need seriously to ensure that any such body is independent enough from the industry parties in order to perform its function properly and without risk of accusations of favour. Removing the word "sufficiently" would actually raise potential difficulties. The question could arise as to whether even Ofcom itself was independent, since it relies for its income on fees collected from industry and its operations within these provisions will be recouped from industry, and that would apply to any body it set up as well. I suggest that the answer to such questions would be that Ofcom, or a body set up by it to administer the code, is independent enough—or "sufficiently independent". The amendment would really not be helpful in the way intended, and I invite the noble Lord to withdraw it.