Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Young of Norwood Green (Labour) in the House of Lords on Monday, 1 March 2010. It occurred during Debate on bill on Digital Economy Bill [HL].


Digital Economy Bill [HL]

My Lords, we seem to be halfway towards pleasing the House if not completely there. I am pleased that we have made some progress in trying to address the problem. I would say to my noble friend that he should take the amendments as a whole. The previous amendment elevated the role of Ofcom to ensure that investment in electronic communication networks was one of its principal duties, which is an important change. I have been trying to get something helpful rather than a legal definition that might engender more of a collective groan than anything else. However, this is not about particular investment decisions but about the creation of a regulatory climate that encourages investment. I know that that is what my noble friend Lord Mitchell wants to do. He seeks to encourage investment in an environment where, as he eloquently described to us, demand is exponential. What is interesting is that so far, and there is no room for complacency, we have managed to meet that demand. We know that there are other things we need to do in terms of the UK providing universal broadband and super broadband and we are focusing on those areas. I also want to make it clear in relation to the concern of the noble Lord, Lord Howard, that Ofcom's principal consideration when making any decisions must be the interests of citizens and consumers, and the new duty is an aspect of that obligation. We are not introducing a power for Ofcom to impact on individual companies’ investment decisions. Instead, the provision is intended to ensure that, as many of your Lordships argued in Committee, when Ofcom is taking regulatory decisions it has in mind the need for investment in public service media content and networks fit for ever-increasing demands and next-generation technologies—to take up the point made by my noble friend Lord Mitchell—for the benefit of all and not just the companies involved. I have endeavoured to address those concerns and, in the light of that, I hope that noble Lords will support the amendment. Amendment 2 agreed. Amendment 3 Moved by


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
717 c1224-5 
Session
2009-10
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Complaints Disclosure of information Compensation Codes of practice Consumers Broadcasting Civil proceedings Climate change Competition Computer networks Copyright Digital broadcasting Broadband Communication Fees and charges ICT EU law Investment Infrastructure Exemptions Emergency services Intellectual property Libraries Internet Electronic publishing Newspaper press Public service broadcasting Ofcom Music Radio frequencies Universities Telecommunications Regulation Repairs and maintenance Rural areas Information Commissioner's Office Subscriptions Internet service providers
Legislation
Digital Economy Bill (HL) 2009-10
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk