On the whole, I welcome the new clause. I simply take this opportunity to reinforce a couple of points that I made earlier. The Minister was very helpful in responding to a question about preservation and he said that he would reconsider the issue. I am pleased that he said that, but I would like to leave him with just one more thought.

The long title says that the Bill makes

“provision about the use and preservation of material deposited”.

So, “preservation” is in the long title. New clause 1 makes allowance for copying electronic or non-print media, but it is couched in terms of copying for the purposes of users. There is a difference between what an archivist does when copying material for users and for conservation purposes. To take another example, one might record a radio programme on a reel to reel, because that gives the highest quality in analogue terms, although goodness knows how it compares in digital terms. However, the user’s copy would be made on a cassette, which would be played on a little cassette machine. In that way, one can preserve the reel-to-reel recording, and there would be no physical deterioration. Of course, there is no physical deterioration in digital recordings, but there is technical deterioration in the sense that the technology moves on, so that what was the dog’s cojones five years ago is not relevant and cannot be used by the reader today.

There must be a way of ensuring that the Bill allows archivists to make preservation copies as well as user copies. I am slightly concerned that new clause 1 is aimed exclusively at the user, although meeting users’ needs is a legitimate aim of librarianship. However, we must remember that there is a second aim of librarianship—conserving materials for future users. Libraries must meet the needs not only of the now but of the future. The Minister has already said that he will reconsider the issue to see whether everything is okay, but I wanted to emphasise the conservation and preservation arguments.

In moving the clause, the hon. Member for Ipswich, referred to terminals. Five minutes ago, the Minister said that every effort had been made to future-proof the Bill, but is the word “terminals” future proof? I am not sure that it is. I can envisage a time when one will no longer have a terminal but a little palm pilot on which to read a PDF file. We must ensure that we do not rule out ways of co-operating between libraries and secure networks, or even between non-networked networks. Goodness knows what broadband will do for us, when it eventually arrives in Aberystwyth. “Terminals” is a strange word, redolent of computer

talk of the 1970s and 1980s. We may need to consider it again. I hope that my remarks will be taken on board between now and Report.