| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Child Protection on the Internet
Lord Tomlinson asked Her Majesty's Government:
- How many times the Task Force on Child Protection on the Internet has met since it was set up last year and what progress has been made. [HL5339]
Lord Falconer of Thoroton: The then Home Secretary (Mr. Straw) announced the establishment of the Task Force on Child Protection on the Internet on 9 May 2001. Since then, the full task force has met four times and most recently on 3 July 2002. The work of the task force has been taken forward by a number of sub-groups which have met regularly and have been looking at the criminal law, law enforcement, child protection measures, public awareness, training and further developing co-operation between the industry and others on reporting and handling child protection issues.
Members of the respective sub-groups have given freely of their time to support the aim we set last year: to make the United Kingdom the best and safest place in the world for children to use the Internet, and to help protect children the world over from abuse fuelled by criminal misuse of new technologies.
The task force has developed, run and now evaluated a successful national awareness campaign. Research had confirmed two key gaps: first, that parents are ill-informed about their children's use of the Internet and chat rooms; and, secondly, that young people give out their personal details without considering the consequences. Two campaigns were designed, one to target 14–16 year-olds and the other parents/carers of 11–13 year-olds. The media used included press advertising, cinema, radio, on-line and viral marketing from December 2001 until spring 2002. Independent evaluation of the campaigns shows significantly improved awarenss of the key messages in both target audiences. The task force is now considering that evaluation and how to build on the momentum created.
The task force has also developed proposals for a criminal offence to tackle the "grooming" of children by paedophiles online or offline. This is intended to allow prosecution at an early stage when children are being groomed, before an existing sexual offence has been committed. In addition, the proposals include the creation of a new civil protection order relating to behaviour towards a child for an illegal or harmful sexual purpose.
Practical online child protection measures have been drawn up in a draft good practice document for service providers which deals with chat, instant messaging and web services. These encourge, among other things, clear and accessible safety messages and
advice and user-friendy ways of reporting abuse. The drafts are being considered by the wider industry through the Internet Service Providers' Association (ISPA) and the London Internet Exchange (LINX).Work is also in hand to develop a shared matrix for reporting and handling child protection issues and developing good practice for dealing with law enforcement requests for information from Internet Service Providers (ISPs). This is being taken forward, with the oversight of the task force, by the Internet Crime Forum.
The task force will continue to work in partnership with the industry to consider the extent to which the criminal law currently covers unsuitable material being sent to children and all the forms of indecent representations of children; assess the new challenges posed by development of 3G mobile phones; and develop basic training materials for child protection staff on children's Internet use.
In parallel with the task force, the United Kingdom has played a leading role in the development of a G8 strategy for protecting children from sexual exploitation on the Internet. The strategy, which is not yet finalised, will cover issues such as victim identification; intelligence gathering and sharing; location of suspects; enforcement tools and training; awareness building and prevention; and police working with industry and non-governmental organisations (NGOs).
Dome Site: Decontamination
Viscount Astor asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether British Gas has decontaminated the site of the Millennium Dome and its surroundings for both commercial and residential use.[HL4647]
The Minister of State, Office of the Deputy Prime Minister (Lord Rooker): Remediation of the dome site and its surroundings was carried out in stages. British Gas, the original landowner, carried out the statutory remediation, removing all substances which could be a danger or harmful to health. The second phase was carried out by English Partnerships, the Government's regeneration agency, to make the site fit for known planned developments.
Both British Gas and English Partnerships employed WS Atkins as their remediation consultants, which secured the agreement of the Environment Agency and the Environmental Health Department of the London Borough of Greenwich to the remediation solutions which were carried out on site.
The whole of the 300-acre Greenwich peninsula site now owned by English Partnerships has been remediated fit for its purpose. Any further remediation will depend upon the final use to which the land is to be put and will relate to the form of construction used.
AONBs: Sporting Arena Applications
Baroness Byford asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Since the publication of the Countryside Commission's Protecting our Finest Countryside: Advice to Government in 1998, whether there have been any applications for major sporting arenas in the South Downs or any other area of outstanding natural beauty; if so, whether they have been called in; and what has been the outcome in each case.[HL4720]
Lord Rooker: There has been one planning application for a major sporting arena within the South Downs, by Brighton Hove Albion Football Club for a community stadium on land north of Village Way, Brighton. Brighton and Hove City Council has resolved to grant planning permission. The application has been referred to the Deputy Prime Minister as a departure from the development plan. The Deputy Prime Minister will consider whether he wishes to call in the application for his own determination. Information on planning applications within all areas of outstanding natural beauty is not held centrally by the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister and could be provided only at disproportionate cost.
Leasehold
Lord Jacobs asked Her Majesty's Government:
- Further to the statement by Lord Falconer of Thoroton at the Labour Party conference in September 2001 that the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Bill was the result of a bargain between the interested parties, whether they can identify any leaseholder or leasehold representative organisation which is aware that they have struck a bargain in this Act with the Government or with any landlord representative.[HL4815]
Lord Rooker: In taking forward their proposals for leasehold reform, the Government always made it clear that they were seeking to strike a fair balance between the legitimate interests of landlords, leaseholders and other parties with an interest in the leasehold system. Both leaseholders and leaseholder representative organisations should, therefore, be fully aware that the provisions of the Commonhold and Leasehold Reform Act 2002 reflect the legitimate interests of landlords as well as those of leaseholders. For further information on the extensive consultation which took place, I would refer the noble Lord to the responses previously given by the Lord Chancellor on 26 March (WA 31) and the noble Baroness, Lady Scotland of Asthal, on 24 April (WA 31–32) and 13 May (WA 6).
Planning Green Paper
Baroness Hanham asked Her Majesty's Government:
- How many respondents to the Planning Green Paper consultation were against the abolition of the
- county council's role in the preparation of structure plans; and whether they will now either review or drop these proposals.[HL5072]
Lord Rooker: The standard response form to the Planning Green Paper included the question, "We are proposing to simplify the hierarchy of plans by strengthening regional planning and abolishing country structure plans. Do you agree?". Of those respondents using the form, 90 per cent answered no. However, in the detailed comments on this question, on 23 per cent said that they wanted to keep/retain county (structure) plans. We hope to make a statement in response to the Green Paper consultation shortly.
Baroness Hanham asked Her Majesty's Government:
- When they will make public a full analysis of the results of the consultation on the Planning Green Paper.[HL5073]
Lord Rooker: The analysis by Messrs Smith and Williamson of the 10,417 detailed responses made on the standard form was placed in the House Library on 27 May and is on the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister website. It was not possible to analyse those responses not using the standard form, many of which were more detailed, in the same way. However, those responses have been considered fully and will inform the Government's thinking in taking forward the proposals.
Anschutz Entertainment Group
Viscount Astor asked Her Majesty's Government:
- What damage could be done to Anschutz Entertainment Group by revealing the priority return due to the company from English Partnerships with regard to the Millennium Dome.[HL5117]
Lord Rooker: It is common practice in commercial agreements of this nature for the parties to agree to maintain commercial confidentiality. Were details of the commercial arrangements to be revealed, this could compromise Anschutz Entertainment Group's negotiations with potential dome users or occupiers and any negotiations conducted by Anschutz Entertainment Group for the delivery of similar facilities elsewhere.
Revealing details of the commercial agreement could also affect English Partnerships' ability to secure value for money for the public purse in their ongoing negotiations with third parties on the Greenwich peninsula and in negotiations on other regeneration projects.
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page