| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Lord Luke: My Lords, it is not necessary for me to say anything at all at this stage except that we on these Benches support all three amendments.
Baroness Cohen of Pimlico: My Lords, my noble friend Lord Puttnam is absent as he is undertaking duties as Chancellor of the University of Sunderland. At his request I should make it clear—it appears to me that this message has been passed round the entire Joint Scrutiny Committee—that this amendment has his full support. Indeed, he had a heavy hand in its drafting.
Lord Phillips of Sudbury: My Lords, I wish to add one point to what has been said. I join in the happiness at the unanimous agreement. I slightly take issue with what the Minister reported of the views of the noble Lord, Lord Currie. The Minister did not misreport the noble Lord, Lord Currie, but I slightly take issue with the purport of his remarks; namely, that the Commons amendment will make life easier from a legal point of view. Be that as it may, whatever has been lost—here I speak as one who doubts the cultural efficacy of markets, if I can put it that way—by taking citizens' interests from a position where they were, so to speak, prior to consumer interests to the position we now have, I believe has been made up for by the fact that the furtherance of the interests of citizens is no longer to be subject to the qualification to do so,
- "where appropriate by promoting competition".
Lord Ashley of Stoke: My Lords, I am pleased that the amendments of my noble friend Lord Puttnam have been accepted by the Government in principle. I know that he is also delighted. He is especially delighted with the statement by the Secretary of State which accompanied the moving of the government amendments. The guiding principle of my noble friend Lord Puttnam is that the citizen should have equal rights and equal consideration with the consumer. I congratulate my noble friend on his enormous achievements in the Bill. I congratulate my noble friend Lord McIntosh on his magnificent input into the Bill. I also thank Tessa Jowell for accepting the amendments.
Baroness Howe of Idlicote: My Lords, I read carefully what was said in the other place. It is clear from that and from what your Lordships have said today that these amendments, even if not entirely satisfactory to everyone, are workable.
I confess to being one of those who retain some doubts, for example, about how potential conflicts of interest between citizens and consumers will be satisfactorily resolved. It may well be that placing such inherently conflicting issues under one regulatory roof makes that inevitable.
However, as others have said—this is crucially important—the word as well as the concept of "citizen" and "citizen's interest"—which is often very different from that of consumers—is now firmly on the face of the Bill. Here I rather share the view of Brian White in the other place who suggested that perhaps an alternative parliamentary legal view is required when disputes about the meanings of words such as "citizen" occur.
So, I confess to being a sufficient "groupie" of the noble Lord, Lord Puttnam, to put my remaining doubts about these clauses to one side!
On Question, Motion agreed to.
3Page 3, line 29, at end insert— "( ) the desirability of encouraging the best means of access to systems of delivery of high speed data transfer throughout the United Kingdom, and, as appropriate, encouraging competitive markets in such systems;"
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do not insist on their Amendment No. 3 to which the Commons have disagreed but do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 3A in lieu thereof.
The Government's commitment to broadband is unequivocal. We have set a clear target to achieve the most competitive and extensive broadband market in the G7 by 2005. As Stephen Timms said in another place, it is important to explain our concerns about whether we needed to include reference to broadband on the face of the Bill. That is the issue before us, not the issue of commitment or the issue of lack of importance to the UK economy, nor that Ofcom would otherwise have no role in encouraging the fair development of the broadband market. The Bill already requires Ofcom to secure availability of a wide range of electronic communications services. That will include broadband services. Therefore, the reservations concern only whether it is necessary to specify broadband on the face of the Bill. There were those on both sides of the Commons who thought that that was not necessary.
However, your Lordships, on the urging of the noble Earl, Lord Northesk, put forward an amendment to refer to broadband in the general duties. The noble Earl convinced the Government that he was right. Commons Amendment No. 3A ensures that what was agreed by this House fits with the structure of the general duties.
In the light of the points made in debate in this House, the measure covers both roll-out and take-up. It will require Ofcom to have regard to the desirability of encouraging roll-out and take-up of high speed data transfer services.
Moved, That the House do not insist on their Amendment No. 3 to which the Commons have disagreed but do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 3A in lieu thereof.—(Lord McIntosh of Haringey.)
The Earl of Northesk: My Lords, needless to say I am extremely grateful to the Minister not only for explaining the terms of the amendment in lieu but also for his courtesy and generosity in keeping me and my co-signatories to the original amendment informed of developments in the Government's thinking. I am content that the formula arrived at by another place meets the concerns expressed in our debates on broadband during our scrutiny of the Bill. As I say, I thank the Minister and the Government for allowing us to arrive at what is a satisfactory meeting of minds and I therefore support the Government's amendment.
On Question, Motion agreed to.
The Commons disagree to this amendment, but propose the following amendment in lieu thereof—
3APage 3, line 42, at end insert—
"( ) the desirability of encouraging the availability and use of high speed data transfer services throughout the United Kingdom;"
3.30 p.m.
42Clause 216, page 192, line 16, at end insert— "(4A) The licence must contain the conditions that OFCOM consider appropriate for securing that persons with disabilities affecting their sight or hearing or both are able, so far as practicable, to make use of the service for all the same purposes as persons without such disabilities."
Lord McIntosh of Haringey: My Lords, I beg to move that the House do not insist on their Amendment No. 42 to which the Commons have disagreed, but do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 42A in lieu thereof. I shall also speak to Amendments Nos. 72A to 72E.
At Third Reading, we accepted Amendment No. 42, which would have required Ofcom to include conditions in the public teletext service to secure that people with sight and/or hearing disabilities were able to use the service for all the same purposes as people without such disabilities. I explained that there were some technical issues to be addressed with regard to the drafting and the placement of the amendment in
At Third Reading, we accepted Amendment No. 72, which requires Ofcom's code relating to provision for the deaf and visually impaired to give guidance as to the extent to which applicable services should promote the understanding and enjoyment of programmes by persons with a dual sensory impairment. I indicated at the time that we would need to make some minor amendments to ensure that the remainder of the provisions on the code were consistent with the change. Amendments Nos. 72A to 72E are therefore minor consequential amendments to make provision for consultation on the code and accessibility of the code to apply to people who have a dual sensory impairment.
Moved, That the House do not insist on their Amendment No. 42 to which the Commons have disagreed, but do agree with the Commons in their Amendment No. 42A in lieu thereof.—(Lord McIntosh of Haringey.)
Lord Addington: My Lords, I agree that the form of wording in Amendment No. 42A is clearer and more direct. I thank the noble Lord for making sure that, as regards Amendment No. 72, we have a way of ensuring that dual sensory impairment is brought in throughout the whole structure. I thank the Government.
The Commons disagree to this amendment, but propose the following amendment in lieu thereof—
42APage 268, line 10, at end insert the following Clause—
"Assistance for the visually impaired with the public teletext service
The regulatory regime for the public teletext service includes the conditions that OFCOM consider appropriate for securing, so far as it is reasonable and practicable, by the inclusion of features in that service, to do so, that persons with disabilities affecting their sight are able to make use of the service."
Next Section
Back to Table of Contents
Lords Hansard Home Page