Schedule 3

Part of Safeguarding Vulnerable Groups Bill [Lords] – in a Public Bill Committee at 9:00 am on 13 July 2006.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Judy Mallaber Judy Mallaber Labour, Amber Valley 9:00, 13 July 2006

I want briefly to explore paragraph 2(1)(e), on regulated activities, with the Minister. It is aimed primarily at regulating those who moderate chat rooms or online discussions forums and is very welcome. However, it refers to

“moderating a public electronic interactive communication service which is likely to be children.”

Before amendments have to be tabled on Report, will the Minister consider whether that provision could apply to electronic interactive communication services that are used to locate children and thus interact with them?

I raised this issue on Second Reading, because an increasing and frightening range of electronic services are being used to track children. Allegedly, such services are meant to promote safety, but there are huge dangers of potential abuse, despite the current voluntary code on who should have access to services and other items. The code is inadequate, and there are too many examples of it not having been followed. I have called for a licensing system for the industry in a Bill that happens to have been sponsored by three members of the Committee—my hon. Friend the Member for Colne Valley (Kali Mountford), the hon. Member for Mid-Dorset and North Poole (Annette Brooke) and my hon. Friend the Member for Wakefield (Mary Creagh). I have also had support from within the industry.

Under the code, someone who is being tracked is meant to give their consent. In that sense, the system is interactive, as set out in paragraph 2(1)(e). Often, however, the electronic interaction is with the child and it might occur with or without their knowledge. That might be in a situation in which they can be put in danger, but it is extremely odd to think of a four-year-old, for example, giving informed consent. That raises the issue of how we can be sure who is doing the tracking and how it is done. We therefore need a regulatory system.

Under paragraph 2(1)(e), chat room moderators will rightly be regulated because of their access to sensitive information and communication channels with children, as well as the need to regulate who operates  such services and how. However, we need to control location services that provide electronic access to children. Some services include information about children’s phone numbers and homes, and the tasks performed by providers of such services are very similar to those performed by chat room moderators.

Will the Minister consider whether the issue can be covered by paragraph 2(1)(e)? If not, can we table an amendment to secure at least one element of the regulatory system and the protection that we need from a mushrooming, scary industry that is using the latest electronic communications technology and which falls right within the scope of our efforts in the Bill to protect vulnerable children? I am happy to talk further to the Minister about this issue before Report, but I ask him now to see whether it could be covered. If not, perhaps we could discuss whether an amendment might be appropriate.