Proceeding contribution from Lord Young of Norwood Green (Labour) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 26 January 2010. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Digital Economy Bill [HL].
Digital Economy Bill [HL]
Again, I am grateful to the noble Earl, Lord Erroll, for tabling the amendment. The purpose of both amendments is to make it a requirement in the Bill for the Government to consult. The first amendment requires the Secretary of State to consult in order to establish whether the failure of a domain registry is serious such that he may have the power to take action against a registry, and to inform the decisions as to who is responsible for the failure, what action needs to be taken and by whom. The second amendment would impose a requirement in the Bill for the Secretary of State to consult before prescribing which practices are unfair or involve the misuse of domain names, and before prescribing the requirements to be placed on registries for dealing with domain name complaints. I give an assurance that we are committed to consultation with the stakeholders. A government code on consultation prescribes the form that consultation should take. We are fully supportive of consultation and are aware of its importance in the decision-making process. The Secretary of State can consider using his powers against a registry only if he is satisfied that the particular registry to which he would address a notification is engaging in a serious relevant failure that could harm the reputation or availability of electronic communication network services and the interests of consumers or members of the public. The Government have made a commitment to consult before the Secretary of State uses his powers. The degree of consultation requirements suggested by the noble Lord risks delaying action to the detriment of the very things that we are all seeking to protect. We believe that the necessary safeguard is already built into the process that we have set out and to which we are committed, including the consultation and prescribed practices and the opportunity for the registry to make representations to the Secretary of State further to being served with a notice. I hope that that explanation and the commitment to consultation will be sufficient to enable the noble Earl to withdraw the amendment.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 716 c1402
- Session
- 2009-10
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Codes of practice Costs Computer networks Copyright Communication ICT EU law Film Libraries Internet Higher education Electronic commerce Mobile phones Ofcom Music Radio frequencies Registration Universities Technology Video piracy Subscriptions Internet service providers Statutory instruments
- Legislation
- Digital Economy Bill (HL) 2009-10
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2025-01-05 10:24:07 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_615346
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_615346
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_615346