Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Faulkner of Worcester (Labour) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 20 January 2010. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Digital Economy Bill [HL].


Digital Economy Bill [HL]

My Lords, I am very happy to respond to the noble Lord, Lord Lucas, and to other noble Lords who have spoken on this amendment. Suspensions of accounts as a technical measure has been somewhat misrepresented in the media and more widely. In particular, terms such as account termination have been bandied about most misleadingly. Let us be clear: when we talk about suspension, that is precisely what we mean; namely, a temporary cessation of access to the internet as a measure which we hope will never need to be employed. If it needed to be employed, it would be on the basis of repeated warnings and with a proper appeals process. I am grateful to the noble Lord for his amendment, which emphasises that point, but I would maintain that the additional phrase is redundant. The noble Lord, Lord Lucas, is one of the most well read and literate Members of your Lordships' House. I am reluctant to quote from the Collins English Dictionary a definition of "suspension". However, it states that suspension is, ""an interruption or temporary revocation"." That is clear enough and, I believe, renders the amendment unnecessary. On that basis, I hope that the noble Lord will agree to withdraw it.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
716 c1086 
Session
2009-10
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Access Codes of practice Appeals Broadcasting Costs Competition Computer networks Copyright Communication Fees and charges ICT Internet Ofcom Tribunals Subscriptions Internet service providers
Legislation
Digital Economy Bill (HL) 2009-10
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk