Oral Answers to Questions Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Leader of the House

Oral Answers to Questions

Claire Perry Excerpts
Thursday 9th February 2012

(12 years, 10 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Vaizey of Didcot Portrait Mr Vaizey
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Gentleman makes a very good point, and that is a very real problem. It is important that the Government work with industry and look at self-regulatory solutions first, because the answers will best come from industry, but there should be no doubt on the industry’s part that this is a very real problem, and we expect action from it to help parents to protect their children from every kind of inappropriate content, whether pornography or inappropriate behaviour, on the internet.

John Bercow Portrait Mr Speaker
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Order. The hon. Member for Devizes (Claire Perry) has a topical question, so the time when we will hear from her will not be long delayed.

--- Later in debate ---
Claire Perry Portrait Claire Perry (Devizes) (Con)
- Hansard - -

T6. Ministers will know that a group of concerned MPs and peers recently concluded a cross-party parliamentary inquiry into online child protection. Without wishing to front-run the conclusions of the report, it is clear that the current protections are failing. We know that 93% of women are extremely concerned about the ease with which online pornography can be accessed by children. The “active choice” response of the internet service providers targets only new customers and will not be rolled out fully until October. Given that 80% of British households are already ISP customers, does the Secretary of State really think that that response is enough? If he does not, what is he going to do about it?

Jeremy Hunt Portrait Mr Jeremy Hunt
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

It is a great pleasure finally to hear from my hon. Friend. I have a great deal of sympathy for her point. She has campaigned assiduously on this issue. I do not want to pre-empt the Green Paper that we will publish shortly. I hope that that will address some of the concerns that she has raised.

--- Later in debate ---
The Leader of the House was asked—
Claire Perry Portrait Claire Perry (Devizes) (Con)
- Hansard - -

1. What recent assessment he has made of the Government’s e-petitions website.

Tom Greatrex Portrait Tom Greatrex (Rutherglen and Hamilton West) (Lab/Co-op)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

2. How many e-petitions have attracted more than 100,000 signatures.

David Heath Portrait The Parliamentary Secretary, Office of the Leader of the House of Commons (Mr David Heath)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

In the six months since the launch of the site, more than 3.5 million signatures have been submitted to more than 11,000 published petitions. Those statistics underpin my view that e-petitions are connecting the Government and Parliament with a remarkable number and range of people. So far, eight e-petitions have passed the 100,000 signature threshold. They remain viewable on the site, including the Government response.

Claire Perry Portrait Claire Perry
- Hansard - -

May I ask the Deputy Leader of the House for his opinion on the report from the Procedure Committee, which is chaired so ably by my right hon. Friend the Member for East Yorkshire (Mr Knight)? The report suggests that e-petitions should be debated in Westminster Hall, which would be opened up so that we have more time for such debates. I welcome that proposal, but my constituents would be very concerned if they thought all e-petitions would be shuffled off to Westminster Hall. Will the Deputy Leader of the House reassure them and me that we will still have time to debate e-petitions on the Floor of the House?

David Heath Portrait Mr Heath
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I agree with the hon. Lady. It is important that the Backbench Business Committee can choose where it holds debates, including on the Floor of the House and in some cases on a substantive motion. Last year’s debate on the release of Hillsborough papers is a good example of just such scheduling of a debate that showed the House at its best.

The Committee should also continue to be able to decide that e-petitions are not appropriate for debate, or that they have already been considered, and not schedule them for debate. Members should be free to seek Adjournment debates on e-petitions if that is felt to be the best route. I note that there will be such a debate in Westminster Hall on 22 February relating to the e-petition on the death of Kevin Williams at Hillsborough.