Draft Online Safety Act 2023 (Category 1, Category 2A and Category 2B Threshold Conditions) Regulations 2025
Robin Swann Excerpts(4 days, 12 hours ago)
General CommitteesRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Robin Swann (South Antrim) (UUP)
It is a pleasure to serve under your chairship, Sir Christopher. I will not repeat many of the points that have already been made, but I want to express my concern that these changes do not bring into scope small but potentially dangerous platforms, including those that bring about specific, targeted abuse and harms, as well as those that disguise themselves as support for preventing self-harm, suicide and eating disorders, but actually promote that ideology and cause further harm.
As the right hon. and learned Member for Kenilworth and Southam (Sir Jeremy Wright) just said, the Government have missed an opportunity to correct what they continue to say this statutory instrument addresses. I also echo the comments made by the hon. Member for Aberdeen North (Kirsty Blackman) on what I see as a blunt tool, which is the setting of the limits at 7 million and 34 million. Reading into the regulations and the explanatory documents shows that the figures are worked out using a six-month mean average, so there is absolutely nothing to prevent one of these platforms, should they want to flout or get below the threshold, from simply delisting or deregistering a number of their users over that six-month rolling period, which would see them fall out of scope of the regulations.
I was not previously in this place, but from listening to other Members speak about previous pieces of legislation that came from the Online Safety Act that considered the level of risk rather than using numbers as a blank term, I encourage the Government, as previous speakers have done, to go back and look at what the legislation is about achieving—protecting our online users.
Feryal Clark
I think the hon. Member missed it when I said that, as things stand, the Secretary of State does not have the power to include them. It is not about removing them; it is about not having the powers to include them, as things stand, at the moment.
I will conclude. In extreme cases, Ofcom, with the agreement of the courts, uses business disruption measures, which are court orders that mean third parties have to withdraw non-compliant services, or restrict or block access to non-compliant services in the UK.
The hon. Member for Newton Abbot also asked whether the Act will be reviewed to address the gaps in it. As I said at the start, our immediate focus is getting the Act implemented quickly and effectively. It was designed to tackle illegal content and protect children, and we want those protections in place as soon as possible. It is right that the Government continually assess the ability of the framework to keep us safe, especially given that technology develops so quickly. We will look, of course, at how effective these protections are and build on the Online Safety Act, based on evidence. However, our message to social media companies remains clear: there is no need to wait. As the Opposition spokesperson said, those companies can and should take immediate action to protect their users.
On the use of business disruption measures, the Act provides Ofcom with powers to apply to court for such measures, as I have said, including where there is continued failure and non-compliance. We expect Ofcom to use all available enforcement mechanisms.
The hon. Member for Huntingdon asked how Parliament can scrutinise the delivery of the legislation. Ongoing parliamentary scrutiny is absolutely crucial; indeed, the Online Safety Act requires Ofcom codes to be laid before Parliament for scrutiny. The Science, Innovation and Technology Committee and the Communications and Digital Committee of the House of Lords will play a vital role in scrutinising the regime. Ofcom’s codes of practice for illegal content duties were laid before Parliament in December. Subject to their passing without objection, we expect them to be in force by spring 2025, and the child safety codes are expected to be laid before Parliament in April, in order to be in effect by summer 2025. Under section 178 of the Act, the Secretary of State is required to review the effectiveness of its regulatory framework between two and five years after key provisions of the Act come into force. That will be published as a report and laid before Parliament.
Letters were sent in advance of laying these regulations to the House of Lords Communications and Digital Committee and the House of Commons Science, Innovation and Technology Committee. Hon. Members have asked about user numbers. Ofcom recommended the threshold of 34 million or 7 million for category 1. Services must exceed the user number thresholds. The Government are not in a position to confirm who will be categorised. That will be the statutory role of Ofcom once the regulations have passed.
Feryal Clark
I am going to make some progress. On livestreaming, Ofcom considered that functionality, but concluded that the key functionalities that spread content easily, quickly and widely are content recommender systems and forwarding or resharing user-generated content.
Services accessed by children must still be safe by design, regardless of whether they are categorised. Small but risky services will also still be required to comply with illegal content duties. The hon. Member for Aberdeen North should be well aware of that as she raised concerns on that issue.
On child safety, there were questions about how online safety protects children from harmful content. The Act requires all services in scope to proactively remove and prevent users from being exposed to priority illegal content, such as illegal suicide content and child sexual exploitation and abuse material. That is already within the remit.
In addition, companies that are likely to be accessed by children will need to take steps to protect children from harmful content and behaviour on their services, including content that is legal but none the less presents a risk of harm to children. The Act designates content that promotes suicide or self-harm as in the category of primary priority content that is harmful to children. Parents and children will also be able to report pro-suicide or pro-self-harm content to the platform and the reporting mechanism will need to be easy to navigate for child users. On 8 May, Ofcom published its draft children’s safety codes of conduct, in which it proposed measures that companies should employ to protect children from suicide and self-harm content, as well as other content.
Finally, on why category 1 is not based on risk, such as the risk of hate speech, when the Act was introduced, category 1 thresholds were due to be assessed on the level of risk of harm to adults from priority content disseminated by means of that service. As I said earlier, that was removed during the Act’s passage by the then Government and replaced with consideration of the likely functionalities and how easily, quickly and widely user-generated content is disseminated, which is a significant change. Although the Government understand that that approach has its critics, who argue that the risk of harm is the most significant factor, that is the position under the Act.
Listed Places of Worship Scheme
Robin Swann Excerpts(2 weeks, 3 days ago)
Westminster HallRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Westminster Hall is an alternative Chamber for MPs to hold debates, named after the adjoining Westminster Hall.
Each debate is chaired by an MP from the Panel of Chairs, rather than the Speaker or Deputy Speaker. A Government Minister will give the final speech, and no votes may be called on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Robin Swann (South Antrim) (UUP)
I thank the hon. Member for (Bradley Thomas) for bringing us this debate. All Saints parish church in South Antrim is one of the finest Elizabethan Gothic ecclesiastic buildings open for worship in the whole island of Ireland. Originally built in 1596, it is currently embarking on a repair project for its bell tower, which will cost just over a quarter of a million pounds. The church has applied for significant funding, but the £45,000 that it hopes to claim from the scheme is crucial to budgeting for that work.
That church is of specific interest because unfortunately, following this year’s Christmas morning service, there was a fire in the church causing significant internal smoke damage. The church is now looking to repair the smoke damage while continuing with the original repair work, so its small congregation is now required to undertake two significant fundraising efforts. It is willing to do that, but the continuation of the listed places of worship grant scheme is crucial to its budgeting.
In regards to other churches in my constituency and across Northern Ireland, representatives of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland who I spoke to talked about the essential services in other churches and church buildings that now may come under pressure, as all Members have raised. I have one word for the Minister, Proverbs 11:14, and I know he will listen to it:
“Without wise leadership, a nation falls; there is safety in having many advisers.”
The Minister has many advisers in this place who are advising him to keep this scheme open. I would encourage him to listen to those words.
Oral Answers to Questions
Robin Swann Excerpts(1 month ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Peter Kyle
I can indeed commit to that. The Government see the embrace of proven technologies and innovation as fundamental to the future survival of the NHS. I was incredibly happy to see that last autumn, the Royal Wolverhampton NHS trust began enrolling patients in a global-first trial of completely personalised cancer vaccines, as part of a £1 billion investment negotiated by my Department. That shows the way forward and how co-operation between Departments will deliver for patients and public service users across the country.
Robin Swann (South Antrim) (UUP)
Early diagnosis saves lives. Randox in my constituency runs a number of NHS health checks from the Isle of Wight through to Lanarkshire. Will the Secretary of State encourage greater use of those checks, and will he visit Randox with me to see how we can further advance that technology?
Peter Kyle
I confirm that I have been working with the Health Secretary—indeed, we recently visited St Tommy’s across the road from here to see how new technology is being used in diagnostics. It is increasing the number of scans and improving the quality of those scans to diagnose disease early and prevent it from having the worst outcome. That is being rolled out across the country, and I am working closely with the Health Secretary to ensure that such innovations are put to good use for the country.