Asked by: Lord Clement-Jones (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what discussions they have had with (1) Ofcom, and (2) Openreach, about the trials in Salisbury and Mildenhall for migrating customers to fibre and withdrawing copper services.
Answered by Baroness Barran - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Education)
We are aware of Openreach’s plans to modernise its telecoms network to deliver telephone services over Internet Protocol technology and migrate customers from copper to fibre broadband. As part of this, it is undertaking trials in Salisbury and Mildenhall to test approaches to migration. Openreach has consulted on its plans for the trials and has publicly set out timings. In addition, Ofcom has consulted on changes to regulations in these areas to allow the trials to go ahead. Openreach hopes to complete full migrations in these areas by the end of 2022.
DCMS regularly engages with the telecoms industry, Ofcom, and other Government departments to discuss these upgrades, including Openreach’s trials. Discussions include the impact these upgrades will have on consumers, business and public services. In addition, DCMS has engaged with other Government departments to ensure they are aware of the trials and relevant local government services are prepared.
Asked by: Lord Clement-Jones (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what discussions they have had with the Intellectual Property Office about the development of guidance similar to “know your customer” guidance for financial services, for wider application under any future online harms legislation.
Answered by Baroness Barran - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Education)
Ministers and officials have regular meetings and discussions with organisations on a range of issues, including the challenge of fraud and anonymity online. Details of Ministerial meetings are published quarterly on the Gov.uk website.
The Full Government Response to the Online Harms White Paper consultation, published in December 2020, sets out expectations on companies to keep their users safe online. This includes a proposed legal duty of care on companies and the appointment of a new communications regulator, Ofcom, to ensure that new laws are enforced.
There are many legitimate reasons why an individual would not wish to identify themselves online. Whistleblowers, victims of modern slavery and survivors of domestic abuse may wish to stay anonymous, to protect their identity online. Our proposals strike the right balance between protecting users’ rights online, while preserving freedom of expression. The Online Safety Bill will be introduced next year.
Asked by: Lord Clement-Jones (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans they have to amend the Electronic Commerce (EC Directive) Regulations 2002 to require intermediaries providing commercial services for online businesses to undertake due diligence measures for the verification of the identities of those conducting digital business services.
Answered by Baroness Barran - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Education)
Her Majesty’s Government has no plans to amend Electronic Commerce (EC Directive) Regulations 2002 to require intermediaries providing commercial services for online businesses to undertake due diligence measures for the verification of the identities of those conducting digital business services.
Asked by: Lord Clement-Jones (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to their announcement on 25 November that their target for the rollout of gigabit broadband to householders in the UK by 2025 has been revised to 85 per cent, when they estimate 100 per cent of households will have such broadband; and what costs will be saved before 2025 as a result of the new target.
Answered by Baroness Barran - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Education)
The Government remains committed to delivering nationwide gigabit connectivity as soon as possible. Our programme for gigabit-capable broadband has made dramatic progress. More than a third of UK premises now have access to gigabit-capable connections, up from nine per cent when the government took office in July 2019. By next year, more than half of all premises will have access. We are working with industry to target a minimum of 85% gigabit-capable coverage by 2025 but will seek to accelerate rollout further to get as close to 100% as possible.
We remain committed to investing £5bn in bringing gigabit coverage to the hardest to reach areas and will continue to work with suppliers to accelerate this investment.
Asked by: Lord Clement-Jones (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what plans they have to address regulatory concerns in relation to the fees levied on application developers by major technology platforms.
Answered by Baroness Barran - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Education)
We are committed to taking action to protect businesses and users from the potential harms associated with substantial and enduring market power in digital platform markets.
Earlier this year, we accepted all the strategic recommendations of the Furman Review and established the cross-regulator Digital Markets Taskforce to advise on the design and implementation of a new pro-competition regime for digital markets.
On 27 November we confirmed the establishment of a new pro-competition regime for tech giants. A Digital Markets Unit (DMU), housed in the Competition and Markets Authority, will be set up to begin to operationalise the new regime. It will work closely with key regulators, including the ICO and Ofcom, to ensure that the new regime is effective and coherent. The Taskforce has advised us that the DMU should prioritise firms active in particular activities, including app stores. We will consider the expert advice and respond in due course. Government will legislate to put the DMU on a statutory footing as soon as parliamentary time allows, following consultation in early 2021.
Asked by: Lord Clement-Jones (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer from Baroness Barran (HL10058) from 11 November, on what basis they propose to use age assurance as opposed to age verification to prevent children accessing online pornography; what is the difference between the two measures; and what assurance they can give that they are equally effective.
Answered by Baroness Barran - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Education)
Protecting children is at the heart of our online harms agenda, and wider government priorities. Our Online Harms proposals will deliver a higher level of protection for children than for the typical adult user.
Age assurance is the term used to describe the broad range of technical measures that can be used by a service to establish the age of their users. Age verification is a form of age assurance that provides the highest level of confidence in a user’s age. Currently age verification measures require a user's age to be established through a full identity verification process, for example through passport or credit card data..
We expect companies to use a proportionate range of tools, including both age assurance and age verification technologies, to prevent children accessing age-inappropriate content such as online pornography and to protect them from other harms.
We will be setting out further details on our approach for protecting children, including the use of age assurance, in the full government response to the Online Harms White Paper consultation, which will be published this year. We will follow this with legislation, which will be ready early next year.
Asked by: Lord Clement-Jones (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what steps they have taken to encourage the adoption of British Board of Film Classification and Video Standards Council best practice guidelines on voluntary age labelling; and what plans they have to introduce legislation on age labelling if it is not implemented voluntarily.
Answered by Baroness Barran - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Education)
While adoption of the British Board of Film Classification’s (BBFC) best practice age ratings by online platforms is currently voluntary, we welcome their adoption by Video on Demand platforms.
For example, Netflix has committed to work towards complete coverage of its content under the BBFC’s ratings and support the BBFC’s drive to encourage other Video On Demand platforms to follow suit. By doing so, industry will provide consumers with well recognised age ratings and consumer advice.
We will keep the evidence for legislation in this area under review and will continue to engage with industry on the issue.
Asked by: Lord Clement-Jones (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of whether the filters adopted by mobile network operators based on British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) guidelines, and regulated by the BBFC, could be supported and promoted as a best practice solution to protect children from adult content online.
Answered by Baroness Barran - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Education)
Protecting children is at the heart of our online harms agenda, and wider government priorities. The government has worked hard to ensure content is filtered in public places where children are likely to be, as well as at home.
The BBFC provides an independent framework for mobile network operators and defines content that is unsuitable for customers under the age of 18 based on their Classification Guidelines for film and video. Like current device level filters, and the filters used by every school in the country, filter software is provided to Internet Service Providers by well-established web filtering companies. There are no plans to require other providers of family friendly filters to use the BBFC’s framework.
Our forthcoming online harms proposals will deliver a higher level of protection for children than for the typical adult user. We expect companies to use a proportionate range of tools, including age assurance and age verification technologies, to prevent children accessing age-inappropriate adult content and to protect them from other harms.
Asked by: Lord Clement-Jones (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the report by the House of Commons Digital, Culture, Media and Sport Committee Impact of COVID-19 on DCMS sectors: First Report (HC 291), published on 20 July, what plans they have, if any, to establish a Creators Council to engage with representatives of the creative workforce.
Answered by Baroness Barran - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Education)
Industry and Government engage regularly with a wide range of leading experts in the creative industries through the Creative Industries Council (CIC), a forum for Government and Industry to convene and share information, discuss concerns and opportunities and muster action. The CIC is formed of a broad range of representative bodies across the sub-sectors of the creative industries.
As outlined in our response to the above named report, we would need clear and robust evidence from the sector as to the purpose of the Creator’s Council and why it would be different from the existing CIC.
Asked by: Lord Clement-Jones (Liberal Democrat - Life peer)
Question to the Department for Digital, Culture, Media & Sport:
To ask Her Majesty's Government what action the Information Commissioner's Office will be taking against misleading statements given by international cloud providers about the security of UK data on their platforms following the following the judgment by the European Court of Justice in the Schrems II case.
Answered by Baroness Barran - Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Department for Education)
The Information Commissioner’s Office is an independent public body and is the UK’s independent regulator for data protection and freedom of information. The UK Government does not speak on its behalf.
Information on the powers available to the Information Commissioner and how they are used is available in the Regulatory Action Policy published on the Information Commissioner’s Office website. The ICO will consider any complaints from individuals that are concerned about their rights in connection with international transfers.
The UK Government’s statement on the Schrems II judgment is available on Gov.UK and the Information Commissioner’s Office have published their most recent statement on their website, which sets out the approach to be taken following the Schrems II judgement.