Draft Collective Investment Schemes (Temporary Recognition) and Central Counterparties (Transitional Provision) (Amendment) Regulations 2024
Draft Insurance Distribution (Regulated Activities and Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations 2024
(1 month, 1 week ago)
General CommitteesRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Economic Secretary to the Treasury (Tulip Siddiq)
I beg to move,
That the Committee has considered the draft Collective Investment Schemes (Temporary Recognition) and Central Counterparties (Transitional Provision) (Amendment) Regulations 2024.
The Chair
With this it will be convenient to consider the draft Insurance Distribution (Regulated Activities and Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations 2024.
Tulip Siddiq
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Efford.
The regulations we are introducing today will ensure that the regulatory framework for financial services is aligned with the UK’s needs following our exit from the European Union. They ensure that UK businesses and individuals can continue to access the products and services that they need even when these originate from outside the UK and that UK authorities have appropriate control over which firms can access our markets. They also ensure that the statute book is clear, comprehensive and relevant to our domestic market.
First, let me turn to the Collective Investment Schemes (Temporary Recognition) and Central Counterparties (Transitional Provision) (Amendment) Regulations 2024. UK investors and firms rely on a wide range of financial products and services to meet their needs, ranging from individuals saving for a rainy day, all the way to multinational corporations needing to settle multimillion-pound transactions. In a highly international industry, many of these products and services originate from outside the UK. Ensuring continued access for UK investors and businesses is therefore crucial to the continued functioning of our economy.
This instrument deals with two such areas of global market access—the ability of collective investment schemes or funds to market to UK retail investors and the ability of overseas central counterparties to provide services to UK firms. I will speak to each of these areas in turn.
The Government previously introduced a new route for overseas funds to become recognised for marketing to UK investors—the overseas funds regime, which the Committee will be familiar with. In July 2024, the first equivalence decision under that regime came into force. This means that certain retail schemes from the European economic area will be able to market to UK investors on an ongoing basis.
Funds from the EEA had been able to passport freely into the UK prior to the UK’s exit from the European Union and a temporary regime was introduced to allow those funds to continue doing so. These temporary arrangements will end in December 2025. The overseas funds regime represents a more permanent solution. However, it will take time to transition the more than 8,000 funds with temporary access to the new regime. Therefore, this instrument extends the temporary regime for a further year, until 2026, to allow for a smooth transition and to avoid any cliff-edge risks.
It is important that the temporary regime continues to work as intended for those funds still using it, namely those funds not in scope of the Government’s equivalence decision. At the same time, we are conscious that the temporary regime should wind down in an orderly fashion. This means that funds in scope of the equivalence decision should be directed towards the overseas funds regime. If they fail to apply or become recognised under that route, they should lose their ability to market freely to UK investors. The instrument also makes technical changes to ensure that is the case, and that sub-funds within the temporary regime are treated appropriately depending on their characteristics.
The two changes combine to ensure that the Government’s decision under the overseas funds regime and the transition from the temporary arrangements will be implemented smoothly, without unintended consequences for investors or fund operators.
Let me turn to the second set of changes delivered by this statutory instrument in relation to overseas central counterparties. Central counterparties, or CCPs, are vitally important market infrastructure firms that help make markets safer and more efficient. They sit between the buyers and sellers of certain financial instruments, providing assurance that contractual obligations will be fulfilled. The process of transacting through a CCP is known as “clearing”.
During EU exit, the Government set up the temporary recognition regime, or TRR, which allowed overseas CCPs that were recognised by the EU before the end of the transition period, and therefore had market access to the UK, to continue to provide services to UK firms. This allowed UK authorities the time to start putting in place longer-term market access arrangements for those overseas CCPs after EU exit.
The TRR has largely functioned well and ensured that EU exit did not disrupt the provision of clearing services into the UK. However, as it stands right now, a CCP within the TRR automatically loses its right to remain in the regime if its EU recognition is withdrawn. This has meant that, since EU exit, several CCPs have exited the TRR, and moved into the UK’s accompanying “run-off regime”, as a result of decisions taken by authorities outside the UK.
There are a variety of circumstances that could lead to EU authorities withdrawing EU recognition from overseas CCPs, but these circumstances may not always be relevant to the UK. For instance, EU recognition has previously been withdrawn because co-operation arrangements have not been agreed between the European Securities and Markets Authority and the relevant national regulator of the overseas CCP. This statutory instrument therefore removes continued EU recognition as a condition for remaining in the TRR. This, combined with the Bank’s continued ability to move a CCP out of the TRR for financial stability reasons, ensures that our UK authorities have appropriate control over which overseas CCPs can provide services to UK firms.
I now turn to the Insurance Distribution (Regulated Activities and Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations 2024. The UK’s financial services sector is central to growing growth in the UK economy, as we discussed in the Chamber yesterday, and insurance is a fundamental contributor. Effective and proportionate regulation is key to this, we believe, and therefore we must ensure that domestic regulation is clear and not burdensome to understand. This statutory instrument makes technical legislative changes that remove or amend references to insurance-related EU directives. It is no longer necessary to refer to them now that the UK is not part of the EU and now that the regulatory regime for insurance distribution is set out entirely in UK law and regulator rules.
This instrument amends the Terrorism Act 2000, the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, the Counter-Terrorism Act 2008, and the Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Transfer of Funds (Information on the Payer) Regulations 2017. It replaces insurance distribution directive-related references with references to the equivalent provisions in the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Regulated Activities) Order 2001. This instrument makes similar amendments to the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Regulated Activities) Order 2001 itself. It also changes the monetary threshold in article 72B of that order below which a person whose main business is not insurance distribution is excluded from regulation by the Financial Conduct Authority. This instrument provides that the threshold will now be denominated in sterling rather than euro. The scope of the exclusion on the distribution of sterling-denominated insurance policies will no longer be dependent on changing exchange rates.
Finally, this instrument removes references to regulations made under the insurance distribution directive from the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (Qualifying Provisions) Order 2013. These provisions gave the Financial Conduct Authority powers to investigate and remedy breaches relating to the insurance distribution directive —powers which are no longer required now that the directive no longer applies in the UK. The amendments made by this instrument may be technical, but they are important in bringing the statute book up to date. Failing to make them could cause confusion as to the relevance of EU law to domestic regulation.
In closing, these statutory instruments make mostly technical changes, which are necessary to ensure that our statute book remains up to date and adequately reflects the UK’s exit from the EU. They also make important provision regarding the provision of services into the UK, either by ensuring that UK firms and investors can access the products and services that best suit their needs, or by giving UK authorities appropriate control over when certain services can be provided. I hope the Committee will join me in supporting these regulations, and I commend them to the Committee.
Mark Garnier (Wyre Forest) (Con)
Thank you, Mr Efford, for chairing these proceedings.
I thank the Minister for going into quite a lot of detail on what is highly technical stuff. The Opposition welcome the changes. They continue the important work started by the previous Government to ensure that our legislative framework is fit for purpose after Brexit. Removing redundant EU references and aligning our investment fund regulations with UK priorities, we are streamlining oversight and maintaining stability in our financial markets. More of interest to the industry will be the clarity given in extending the temporary marketing permissions regime before the roll-out of the overseas funds regime.
As I said, we absolutely welcome the changes; but I do have a couple of questions, the first of which is on the application process for the funds. We are introducing landing slots for UCITS funds transitioning from the TMPR to the OFR. What steps are the Government taking to ensure that fund operators are fully prepared and supported to meet the deadlines to avoid any disruptions?
The other thing that is important for the future of the City and the growth agenda of the City is reciprocal access. While this is all about allowing access for European operators to come into the UK post Brexit—this may be a wider point to do with the growth agenda—what measures will the Government be taking to try to get reciprocal access for UK products to be marketed in the European Union?
Aside from those two questions, we are very happy with this move and will be supporting these measures.
Tulip Siddiq
I thank the Opposition spokesperson for his points. He knows this area well and I am glad he supports the work that we are doing. We will keep an eye on the timeline, as he says, but regulatory and supervisory frameworks of the UK and other jurisdictions can change over time, so it is important that the Government monitor that; we will be keeping an eye on it. We want to ensure that the changes that happen in the UK and regimes in the EU and other overseas regimes are compatible with the existing equivalence determinations with an outcomes-based approach. So he is right to say it is important for the growth of the financial services sector. I have already taken proportionate steps to monitor any changes over the timeframe pertinent to existing equivalence determinations, but I will keep an eye on the deadline and the wider growth. The FCA has made the process very clear for funds, and it is working closely with the firms as well.
Further exact timings can be found on the FCA’s website. I am also happy to write to the hon. Gentleman if he would like. All UK equivalence decisions are taken on their own merits, following a technical, outcomes-based assessment of the other country or territory’s regulatory and supervisory regime. So the Government will make equivalence decisions when it is in the UK’s interests to make them—I am sure he is aware of that—but any decisions regarding the granting of equivalence decisions for the UK are a matter for the European Commission. However, I did meet Commissioner McGuinness, the outgoing Commissioner, and I have plans in the diary to meet the new Commissioner. I will raise this subject when I go, because I do think it is important, for the growth of financial services, as the hon. Gentleman says, and for the wider economy.
I hope you found the debate informative, Mr Efford, and I hope hon. Members will join me in supporting the regulations.
The Chair
I was hanging on your every word.
Question put and agreed to.
DRAFT INSURANCE DISTRIBUTION (REGULATED ACTIVITIES AND MISCELLANEOUS AMENDMENTS) REGULATIONS 2024
Resolved,
That the Committee has considered the draft Insurance Distribution (Regulated Activities and Miscellaneous Amendments) Regulations 2024.—(Tulip Siddiq.)
Draft Terrorism Act 2000 (Alterations to the Search Powers Code for Northern Ireland) Order 2024
(1 month, 1 week ago)
General CommitteesRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Northern Ireland (Fleur Anderson)
I beg to move,
That the Committee has considered the draft Terrorism Act 2000 (Alterations to the Search Powers Code for Northern Ireland) Order 2024.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer, and I am grateful to the Committee for being here to consider this instrument. The order was laid before Parliament on 15 October 2024.
The UK, and Northern Ireland in particular, knows all too well the human cost of terrorism. This week sees the 50th anniversary of the Birmingham pub bombings. The vast majority of people in Northern Ireland want it to continue to be a safe and wonderful place in which to live and work. However, despite the work of the Police Service of Northern Ireland and other security services, we know that there is a small minority that continues to want to cause harm. It is important that the PSNI has the tools it needs to allow it to continue to keep people safe. I would like to take this opportunity to thank our former and current police officers and members of the security services, who work so hard and with such courage to keep us safe.
Following the terrorist attack at Fishmongers’ Hall in November 2019, the then Home Secretary commissioned the independent reviewer of terrorism legislation, Jonathan Hall KC, to review the multi-agency public protection arrangements, commonly referred to as MAPPA, which are used to supervise terrorist and terrorist-risk offenders on licence in the community. In response to recommendations made by Jonathan Hall KC following that review, the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022, hereafter referred to as the 2022 Act, established three new powers for counter-terrorism policing: a personal search power, a premises search power and a power of urgent arrest. Those powers were established in 2022.
The order relates to the new power of personal search, the creation of which was also recommended by the “Fishmongers’ Hall Inquests: Prevention of future deaths” report. That power, which came into force on 28 June 2022, was inserted into the Terrorism Act 2000 in section 43C by the 2022 Act and applies UK-wide. The order puts into practice the revised “Code of practice (Northern Ireland) for the authorisation and exercise of stop and search powers relating to sections 43, 43A, 43C and 47A of, and schedule 6B to, the Terrorism Act 2000”, hereafter referred to as the code. A copy of the draft revised code was laid before Parliament on 15 October 2024. The purpose of the code is to provide guidance to officers authorising and conducting stop and search under sections 43, 43A, 43C and 47A of, and schedule 6B to, the Terrorism Act 2000, and protection to persons being searched.
I would like to start by assuring hon. Members that the revisions to the code will not change the manner in which searches are conducted in any way. The amendments should be non-contentious and relate mainly to technical matters. They are intended to provide guidance to the Police Service of Northern Ireland on the search powers in the Terrorism Act 2000. The equivalent code of practice for police in England, Wales and Scotland was updated in 2022. The changes to the Northern Ireland code will align with the code of practice for England, Wales and Scotland, but will not mirror it exactly due to jurisdictional differences.
The revised code builds on work started by previous Ministers in the Northern Ireland Office. I will outline the main revisions. The primary update to the code is the incorporation of the new stop-and-search power provided for by section 43C of the Terrorism Act 2000. The code as amended provides guidance to the Police Service of Northern Ireland, and to officers from police services in England, Wales and Scotland when operating in Northern Ireland, not only on the use of sections 43, 43A and 47A of, and schedule 6B to, the Terrorism Act 2000, as outlined in the original code of practice, but on the use of section 43C.
Section 43C provides a power for a constable to search a terrorist offender who has been released on licence and not recalled, and whose licence includes a search condition. I wish to reassure hon. Members that this power applies only to those who have been convicted and for whom, when released, it was deemed appropriate to have this licence condition included as part of the conditions of their release. Even when the power is included as a licence condition, in order for it to be used, the constable must be satisfied that it is necessary to do so for purposes connected with protecting members of the public from a risk of terrorism. Furthermore, the constable may conduct the search in any place they have access to legally, whether or not that is a place to which the public has access.
In revising the code to include the section 43C power, we have set out for police officers the basic principles for its use, and clarity on its scope. This includes guidance on when the power can be used and the powers of seizure associated with the search power.
The revised code also clearly sets out limitations on the clothing that a person can be required to remove when the section 43C power is being exercised by officers. In keeping with existing stop-and-search powers, police officers exercising the section 43C power may not compel a person to remove any clothing in public except for an outer coat, a jacket or gloves, and an intimate search may not be authorised or carried out under the new power.
Also added to the NI code is an explanation of when the search condition can be added to a licence, specifically to help to manage the risk posed by terrorist offenders on licence who are assessed to be a high or very high risk to the public.
Finally, the code as amended contains some language and formatting differences from the code for Great Britain. However, the purpose and key content of the code remains the same. These differences reflect the devolution of policing and justice functions in Northern Ireland and subsequent differences in approach adopted in different jurisdictions. For example, the code for Great Britain contains an explanation of the basis upon which an offender is to be released on licence, whereas the revised code for Northern Ireland outlines the roles of both the Parole Commission and the Department of Justice in the process.
The Government ran a 12-week public consultation on the proposed amendments to the code of practice, which closed in January 2024. Seven responses were received, six of which were in favour of the revisions, with one response commenting that, as a matter of policy, it would not be appropriate for them to comment. Of the six who responded in favour, five suggested other slight amendments to the code, which were duly considered, with a number being accepted. The full details of those suggestions were published in the consultation response document on the NIO webpages in March 2024.
I hope that hon. Members will agree that, while these revisions are technical, they are important. They align the code of practice used in Northern Ireland with the code used in the rest of the UK, ensuring that this offender management tool is available across the UK. They give guidance to the PSNI in its use of the stop-and-search powers in the Terrorism Act.
This Government are committed to keeping people safe. The fact that the threat level for Northern Ireland-related terrorism in Northern Ireland remains “substantial”, following its reduction in March 2024, is testament to the tremendous efforts of the PSNI and security partners. We must ensure that they have the right and appropriate tools in order to continue to do this.
I know that hon. Members will join me in welcoming the increased additional security funding that will be provided to the PSNI in the next financial year. This £37.8 million of funding, provided in recognition of the unique security situation in Northern Ireland, ensures that the PSNI is equipped to tackle the threat posed by Northern Ireland-related terrorism in Northern Ireland.
The revised code promotes the fundamental principles to be observed by the police, and helps to preserve the effectiveness of, and public confidence in, the use of police powers to stop and search under the Terrorism Act 2000. I very much hope that hon. Members will support these alterations to the code of practice.
Alex Burghart (Brentwood and Ongar) (Con)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Stringer.
Hon. Members will be disappointed to hear that I do not intend to detain them for long. We support this order. As my noble friend Lord Caine said in Grand Committee in the other place, this is essentially Conservative legacy legislation. We drafted it, we conducted the consultation earlier in the year, and we are pleased to see that the Government have continued with it.
I want to raise a couple of small points, the first of which is technical. The hon. Lady referred to how an intimate search may not be authorised or carried out under the new power. Will she give us a little more detail about why that decision was made? Secondly, looking to the future, we all hope to see this change implemented. What provision are the Government making to review the new code to ensure that it is working effectively and getting the results that we all want?
Thirdly, the hon. Lady referred to the fact that the Government have made money available in the Budget for additional security funding for Northern Ireland. There is, as she will know, quite a long-standing problem with police numbers in Northern Ireland. At the moment, I think the PSNI has 6,300, and the number agreed in New Decade, New Approach was 7,500. What is the Minister doing in conjunction with the Secretary of State and the Northern Ireland Executive to make sure that the PSNI can get up to the required figure, which obviously has implications for national security?
That said, I join the hon. Lady in thanking the PSNI for the work it does for the people of Northern Ireland, and indeed for all of us in the United Kingdom, and I congratulate it on helping to reduce the threat level from “severe” to “substantial”. I am pleased to say that my party will be supporting the order today.
Fleur Anderson
I thank the hon. Gentleman for raising those important points about how the code of practice will be put into operation, as well as the wider points about the policing context in Northern Ireland. I also thank other hon. Members for their support.
In terms of intimate search, it is really important to maintain the confidence of the police and for the public to know that there are regulations governing the powers. This is an operational matter; how that is conducted will be up to police officers, but they will know about the very clear limits set on what clothing can be taken off and in which places this can be carried out—I can write to the hon. Gentleman with more detail on these issues.
The code will continue to be reviewed, as all operational matters are. This will now be an operational matter for the Chief Constable in Northern Ireland, but as Ministers we will continue to take a keen interest in the ages and ethnicity of the people that the power is used with. I have been asking questions about all those issues, and we will continue to do so, because it is really important that the powers are used within those confines—they need to be used—and that they are well used, but also that the public have confidence in them and how they are used.
Finally on policing, the Government absolutely recognise the difficult financial position that the PSNI faces, including in terms of police numbers. Policing is largely a devolved matter, as the hon. Gentleman will know, and it is for the Chief Constable to look at additional police numbers, as an operational matter. However, last week’s Budget delivered a record £18.2 billion for the Northern Ireland Executive in 2025-26. This was the largest settlement in real terms in the history of devolution, in recognition of the unique security situation in Northern Ireland. The Government are also making additional security funding payments, but it is up to the Chief Constable as to how he will use them when it comes to additional police numbers. The report on paramilitary groups in Northern Ireland—an additional area of concern—was published in 2015 and was intended to inform ongoing cross-party talks. This remains an area that we are closely watching for any additional funding needed.
To conclude, this statutory instrument is largely technical, but it is important to policing in Northern Ireland, to help the police continue to keep people safe and to have the confidence of everyone across all communities in Northern Ireland. The Government are committed to ensuring that the people of Northern Ireland, as in the rest of the UK, are safe. I therefore commend the order to the Committee.
Question put and agreed to.
Draft Communications Act 2003 (Disclosure of Information) Order 2024
(1 month, 1 week ago)
General CommitteesRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology (Feryal Clark)
I beg to move,
That the Committee has considered the draft Communications Act 2003 (Disclosure of Information) Order 2024.
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Twigg. I start by welcoming the shadow Minister, the hon. Member for Runnymede and Weybridge, to his place. I look forward to many encounters with him—we will have another tomorrow.
The Online Safety Act 2023 lays the foundations for strong protections for children and adults online, and I thank colleagues for their continued interest in the Act and its implementation. It is critical that the Act is made fully operational as quickly as possible, and the Government are committed to ensuring that its protections are delivered as soon as possible.
The draft order will further support the implementation of the 2023 Act by Ofcom. It concerns Ofcom’s ability to share business information with Ministers for the purpose of fulfilling functions of the 2023 Act under section 393 of the Communications Act 2003. It corrects an oversight in the 2023 Act that was identified following its passage.
Section 393 of the Communications Act 2003 contains a general restriction on Ofcom’s disclosing information about particular businesses without their consent. It includes exemptions, including where such a disclosure would facilitate Ofcom’s carrying out its regulatory functions or where it would facilitate other specified persons in carrying out specified functions. However, the section currently does not enable Ofcom to share information with Ministers for the purpose of their fulfilling functions under the Online Safety Act, although the 2003 Act does contain similar information-sharing powers in respect of the Enterprise Act 2002 and the Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013. That means that were Ofcom to disclose information about businesses to the Secretary of State, it may be in breach of the law.
It is important that a gateway exists for sharing information for these purposes, so that the Secretary of State can carry out key functions of the Online Safety Act, such as setting the fee threshold for the online safety regime in 2025 or carrying out the post-implementation review of the Act required under section 178. The draft order will therefore amend the 2003 Act to allow Ofcom to share information with the Secretary of State and other Ministers strictly for the purpose of fulfilling functions under the Online Safety Act.
There are strong legislative safeguards and limitations on the disclosure of this information, and Ofcom is experienced in handling confidential and sensitive information obtained from the services it regulates. Ofcom must comply with UK data protection law and would need to show that the processing of any personal data was necessary for a lawful purpose. As a public body, Ofcom is also required to act compatibly with the article 8 right to privacy in the European convention on human rights. We will continue to review the Online Safety Act so that Ofcom is able to support the delivery of functions under the Act where appropriate.
Dr Ben Spencer (Runnymede and Weybridge) (Con)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairmanship, Mr Twigg. I welcome the Minister to her place; it is great to be able to serve opposite her as shadow Minister of State.
I am sure that colleagues across the House welcome the fact that the Online Safety Act is on the statute book and will want to make sure that its provisions are fit for purpose and can be utilised as soon as possible. This tidying-up order is necessary to resolve the particular lacuna of law that has been discovered with regard to data disclosure. That in itself is uncontroversial. Clearly, there are questions to be asked in respect of ensuring that any data sharing is proportionate and that the confidentiality of data held by businesses is not infringed in fulfilment of the duty to share data with the Secretary of State. What confidence does the Minister have that businesses have an adequate redress mechanism to ensure that any data sharing that occurs under this measure is proportionate and meets the legal criteria, as she set out?
Victoria Collins (Harpenden and Berkhamsted) (LD)
There is far too much illegal harmful activity online, especially on social media, and it impacts women and young children disproportionately. Not only have parents reached out to me, but when I have spoken to young people themselves in schools and the Girl Guides, they have said that it is online harm and bullying that worries them the most. The Government and social media companies must do more to keep people—especially young people and children—safe online. Liberal Democrats respect the right to privacy and freedom of expression for those who use these platforms legally and responsibly, but bullying and abuse must be stamped out.
We therefore welcome this measure to update legislation so that Ofcom can fulfil its duties. We just want to ensure that, while doing so, it protects the right to privacy; that codes of practice can be used to innovate, or to push companies to further innovate, so that we can protect people online; and that education for those who can be upskilled to understand how to protect themselves from online harms forms part of the bigger picture. I thank the Minister for introducing the draft order, which we will support.
Feryal Clark
I thank the shadow Minister and the Liberal Democrat spokesperson for their comments. The Government are committed to the effective implementation of the Online Safety Act. It is crucial that we remove any barriers to that, as we are doing with this draft order, which will ensure that Ofcom can co-operate and share online safety information with the Secretary of State where it is appropriate to do so, as intended during the Act’s development.
The shadow Minister asked about proportionality. There are safeguards around the sharing of business information. Section 393 of the 2003 Act prohibits the disclosure of information about a particular business that was obtained using powers under certain Acts listed in the section, except with consent or where an exception applies. Ofcom is therefore restricted in disclosing information obtained using its powers to require information and other powers under the Online Safety Act, except where an exception applies. Ofcom is an experienced regulator and understands the importance of maintaining confidentiality. It is also a criminal offence for a person to disclose information in contravention of section 393 of the 2003 Act, including to the Secretary of State.
The Liberal Democrat spokesperson asked about the Online Safety Act’s implementation. On 17 October, Ofcom published an updated road map setting out its implementation plans. Firms will need to start risk-assessing for illegal content by the end of the year, once Ofcom finalises its guidance. The illegal content duties will be fully in effect by spring 2025, and Ofcom can start enforcing against the regime. Firms will have to start risk-assessing for harms to children in spring 2025, and the child safety regime will be fully in effect by summer 2025.
I hope that the Committee agrees with me about the importance of implementing the Online Safety Act and ensuring that it can become fully operational as quickly as possible. I commend the draft order to the Committee.
Question put and agreed to.