This is Google's cache of http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmtoday/cmdebate/32.htm. It is a snapshot of the page as it appeared on 8 Apr 2010 01:33:11 GMT. The current page could have changed in the meantime. Learn more

Text-only version
 

Prepared: 01:22 on 8 April 2010

Go back to index

Back to top

10.58 pm

More than two hours having elapsed since the commencement of proceedings in the Committee, the proceedings were interrupted (Order, this day).

The Chair put forthwith the Questions necessary for the disposal of the business to be concluded at that time (Standing Order No. 83D).

Clause 8, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 9 and 10 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 11

Obligations To Limit Internet Access

Amendments made: 44, page 15, line 25, after ‘unless’ insert—

‘(a) the Secretary of State has complied with subsections (6) to (10), and

(b)’.

Amendment 45, page 15, line 27, at end insert—

‘(6) If the Secretary of State proposes to make an order under this section, the Secretary of State must lay before Parliament a document that—

(a)explains the proposal, and

(b)sets it out in the form of a draft order.

(7)During the period of 60 days beginning with the day on which the document was laid under subsection (6) (“the 60-day period”), the Secretary of State may not lay before Parliament a draft order to give effect to the proposal (with or without modifications).

(8)In preparing a draft order under this section to give effect to the proposal, the Secretary of State must have regard to any of the following that are made with regard to the draft order during the 60-day period—

(a)any representations, and

(b)any recommendations of a committee of either House of Parliament charged with reporting on the draft order.

(9)When laying before Parliament a draft order to give effect to the proposal (with or without modifications), the Secretary of State must also lay a document that explains any changes made to the proposal contained in the document laid before Parliament under subsection (6).

(10) In calculating the 60-day period, no account is to be taken of any time during which Parliament is dissolved or prorogued or during which either House is adjourned for more than 4 days.’—(Mr. Timms.)

Clause 11, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 12 to 14 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 15

Enforcement Of Obligations

Amendment made: 3, page 19, line 42, after ‘provider’ insert ‘or owner’.—(Mr. Timms.)

Clause 15, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clauses 16 and 17 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 18 disagreed to.

Clauses 19 to 28 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 29 disagreed to.

Clauses 30 to 42 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 43 disagreed to.

Clauses 44 to 48 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 49

Commencement

Amendment made: 7, page 59, line 44, at end insert

‘and the entry in Schedule 3 relating to the Public Lending Right Act 1979 (and section 47 so far as it relates to that entry)’.—(Mr. Timms.)

Clause 49, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 50

Short Title

Amendment made: 8, page 60, line 3, leave out subsection (2).

Clause 50, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Schedule 1 agreed to.

Schedule 2 disagreed to.

Schedule 3 agreed to.

New Clause 1

Power To Make Provision About Injunctions Preventing Access To Locations On The Internet

‘(1) The Secretary of State may by regulations make provision about the granting by a court of a blocking injunction in respect of a location on the internet which the court is satisfied has been, is being or is likely to be used for or in connection with an activity that infringes copyright.

(2) “Blocking injunction” means an injunction that requires a service provider to prevent its service being used to gain access to the location.

(3) The Secretary of State may not make regulations under this section unless satisfied that—

(a) the use of the internet for activities that infringe copyright is having a serious adverse effect on businesses or consumers,

(b) making the regulations is a proportionate way to address that effect, and

(c) making the regulations would not prejudice national security or the prevention or detection of crime.

(4) The regulations must provide that a court may not grant an injunction unless satisfied that the location is—

(a) a location from which a substantial amount of material has been, is being or is likely to be obtained in infringement of copyright,

(b) a location at which a substantial amount of material has been, is being or is likely to be made available in infringement of copyright, or

(c) a location which has been, is being or is likely to be used to facilitate access to a location within paragraph (a) or (b).

(5) The regulations must provide that, in determining whether to grant an injunction, the court must take account of—

(a) any evidence presented of steps taken by the service provider, or by an operator of the location, to prevent infringement of copyright in the qualifying material,

(b) any evidence presented of steps taken by the copyright owner, or by a licensee of copyright in the qualifying material, to facilitate lawful access to the qualifying material,

(c) any representations made by a Minister of the Crown,

(d) whether the injunction would be likely to have a disproportionate effect on any person’s legitimate interests, and

(e) the importance of freedom of expression.

(6) The regulations must provide that a court may not grant an injunction unless notice of the application for the injunction has been given, in such form and by such means as is specified in the regulations, to—

(a) the service provider, and

(b) operators of the location.

(7) The regulations may, in particular—

(a) make provision about when a location is, or is not, to be treated as being used to facilitate access to another location,

(b) provide that notice of an application for an injunction may be given to operators of a location by being published in accordance with the regulations,

(c) provide that a court may not make an order for costs against the service provider,

(d) make different provision for different purposes, and

(e) make incidental, supplementary, consequential, transitional, transitory or saving provision.

(8) The regulations may—

(a) modify Chapter 6 of Part 1 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, and

(b) make consequential provision modifying Acts and subordinate legislation.

(9) Regulations under this section may not include provision in respect of proceedings before a court in England and Wales without the consent of the Lord Chancellor.

(10) Regulations under this section must be made by statutory instrument.

(11) A statutory instrument containing regulations under this section may not be made unless—

(a) the Secretary of State has complied with section [Consultation and Parliamentary scrutiny], and

(b) a draft of the instrument has been laid before and approved by a resolution of each House of Parliament.

(12) In this section—

“copyright owner” has the same meaning as in Part 1 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988;

“Minister of the Crown” has the same meaning as in the Ministers of the Crown Act 1975;

“modify” includes amend, repeal or revoke;

“operator”, in relation to a location on the internet, means a person who has editorial control over material available at the location;

“qualifying material”, in relation to an injunction, means the material taken into account by the court for the purposes of provision made under subsection (4);

“service provider” has the same meaning as in section 97A of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988;

“subordinate legislation” has the same meaning as in the Interpretation Act 1978.

(13) In the application of this section to Scotland—

“costs” means expenses;

“injunction” means interdict.’.—(Mr. Timms.)

Brought up, and added to the Bill.

New Clause 2

Consultation And Parliamentary Scrutiny

‘(1) Before making regulations under section [Power to make provision about injunctions preventing access to locations on the internet] the Secretary of State must consult—

(a) the Lord President of the Court of Session and the Lord Chief Justice of Northern Ireland,

(b) the persons that the Secretary of State thinks likely to be affected by the regulations (or persons who represent such persons), and

(c) such other persons as the Secretary of State thinks fit.

(2) If, following the consultation under subsection (1), the Secretary of State proposes to make regulations under section [Power to make provision about injunctions preventing access to locations on the internet], the Secretary of State must lay before Parliament a document that—

(a) explains the proposal and sets it out in the form of draft regulations,

(b) explains the reasons why the Secretary of State is satisfied in relation to the matters listed in section [Power to make provision about injunctions preventing access to locations on the internet](3)(a) to (c), and

(c) contains a summary of any representations made during the consultation under subsection (1).

(3) During the period of 60 days beginning with the day on which the document was laid under subsection (2) (“the 60-day period”), the Secretary of State may not lay before Parliament a draft statutory instrument containing regulations to give effect to the proposal (with or without modifications).

(4) In preparing draft regulations under section [Power to make provision about injunctions preventing access to locations on the internet] to give effect to the proposal, the Secretary of State must have regard to any of the following that are made with regard to the draft regulations during the 60-day period—

(a) any representations, and

(b) any recommendations of a committee of either House of Parliament charged with reporting on the draft regulations.

(5) When laying before Parliament a draft statutory instrument containing regulations to give effect to the proposal (with or without modifications), the Secretary of State must also lay a document that explains any changes made to the proposal contained in the document laid before Parliament under subsection (2).

(6) In calculating the 60-day period, no account is to be taken of any time during which Parliament is dissolved or prorogued or during which either House is adjourned for more than 4 days.’.—(Mr. Timms.)

Brought up, and added to the Bill.

Title

Amendment made: 10, line 2, leave out from ‘copyright’ to ‘to’ in line 3 and insert

‘and about penalties for infringement of copyright and performers’ rights’.—(Mr. Timms.)

The Deputy Speaker resumed the Chair. Bill, as amended, reported. Bill, as amended in the Committee, considered.

Question put forthwith (Order, this day), That the Bill be now read the Third time.

The House divided: Ayes 189, Noes 47.

Division No. 132]        [11.03pm

AYES

Afriyie, Adam
Alexander, rh Mr. Douglas
Allen, Mr. Graham
Anderson, Mr. David
Austin, Mr. Ian
Bailey, Mr. Adrian
Bain, Mr. William
Baird, Vera
Barron, rh Mr. Kevin
Battle, rh John
Bayley, Hugh
Beckett, rh Margaret
Benton, Mr. Joe
Berry, Roger
Betts, Mr. Clive
Blackman, Liz
Blizzard, Mr. Bob
Bradshaw, rh Mr. Ben
Brennan, Kevin
Brown, rh Mr. Nicholas
Browne, rh Des
Bryant, Chris
Buck, Ms Karen
Butler, Ms Dawn
Byrne, rh Mr. Liam
Caborn, rh Mr. Richard
Cairns, David
Campbell, Mr. Alan
Cawsey, Mr. Ian
Chapman, Ben
Clapham, Mr. Michael
Clark, Paul
Clarke, rh Mr. Charles
Clelland, Mr. David
Clwyd, rh Ann
Coaker, Mr. Vernon
Coffey, Ann
Cohen, Harry
Connarty, Michael
Cooper, Rosie
Cooper, rh Yvette
Creagh, Mary
Cryer, Mrs. Ann
Cunningham, Mr. Jim
Cunningham, Tony
Davidson, Mr. Ian
Davies, Mr. Quentin
Dean, Mrs. Janet
Dobbin, Jim
Dobson, rh Frank
Doran, Mr. Frank
Eagle, Angela
Eagle, Maria
Efford, Clive
Ellman, Mrs. Louise
Fitzpatrick, Jim
Flint, rh Caroline
Follett, Barbara
Foster, Mr. Michael (Worcester)
Foster, Michael Jabez (Hastings and Rye)
Francis, Dr. Hywel
Gapes, Mike
Gardiner, Barry
George, rh Mr. Bruce
Gilroy, Linda
Goggins, rh Paul
Goodman, Helen
Hall, Mr. Mike
Hamilton, Mr. David
Hanson, rh Mr. David
Harman, rh Ms Harriet
Havard, Mr. Dai
Hayes, Mr. John
Healey, rh John
Henderson, Mr. Doug
Hendrick, Mr. Mark
Hesford, Stephen
Hill, rh Keith
Hillier, Meg
Hodgson, Mrs. Sharon
Hoon, rh Mr. Geoffrey
Hope, Phil
Hopkins, Kelvin
Hosie, Stewart
Humble, Mrs. Joan
Hunt, Mr. Jeremy
Hutton, rh Mr. John
Iddon, Dr. Brian
Illsley, Mr. Eric
Ingram, rh Mr. Adam
Irranca-Davies, Huw
Jackson, Glenda
James, Mrs. Siân C.
Johnson, rh Alan
Johnson, Ms Diana R.
Jones, Helen
Jones, Mr. Kevan
Jones, Mr. Martyn
Jowell, rh Tessa
Keeley, Barbara
Keen, Alan
Keen, Ann
Kelly, rh Ruth
Kemp, Mr. Fraser
Khan, rh Mr. Sadiq
Kidney, Mr. David
Ladyman, Dr. Stephen
Lammy, rh Mr. David
Laxton, Mr. Bob
Lepper, David
Levitt, Tom
Lewis, Mr. Ivan
Linton, Martin
Lucas, Ian
Mackinlay, Andrew
MacShane, rh Mr. Denis
Mann, John
McAvoy, rh Mr. Thomas
McCabe, Steve
McCarthy-Fry, Sarah
McDonnell, John
McFadden, rh Mr. Pat
McFall, rh John
McKechin, Ann
McNulty, rh Mr. Tony
Merron, Gillian
Michael, rh Alun
Milburn, rh Mr. Alan
Miller, Andrew
Moffatt, Laura
Mole, Chris
Morden, Jessica
Mountford, Kali
Mudie, Mr. George
Mullin, Mr. Chris
Munn, Meg
Naysmith, Dr. Doug
Norris, Dan
O'Brien, rh Mr. Mike
O'Hara, Mr. Edward
Osborne, Sandra
Owen, Albert
Pearson, Ian
Pope, Mr. Greg
Prentice, Bridget
Primarolo, rh Dawn
Purchase, Mr. Ken
Purnell, rh James
Raynsford, rh Mr. Nick
Reed, Mr. Jamie
Reid, rh John
Robertson, John
Ruddock, Joan
Salter, Martin
Seabeck, Alison
Sharma, Mr. Virendra
Sheridan, Jim
Simon, Mr. Siôn
Skinner, Mr. Dennis
Smith, Ms Angela C. (Sheffield, Hillsborough)
Smith, rh Angela E. (Basildon)
Spellar, rh Mr. John
Stewart, Ian
Stoate, Dr. Howard
Strang, rh Dr. Gavin
Straw, rh Mr. Jack
Sutcliffe, Mr. Gerry
Tami, Mark
Thomas, Mr. Gareth
Timms, rh Mr. Stephen
Touhig, rh Mr. Don
Trickett, Jon
Ussher, Kitty
Vaizey, Mr. Edward
Watts, Mr. Dave
Whitehead, Dr. Alan
Wicks, rh Malcolm
Williams, rh Mr. Alan
Williams, Mrs. Betty
Wills, rh Mr. Michael
Wilson, Phil
Winnick, Mr. David
Winterton, rh Ms Rosie
Woodward, rh Mr. Shaun
Woolas, Mr. Phil
Wright, David
Wright, Mr. Iain
Wright, Dr. Tony
Wyatt, Derek
Tellers for the Ayes:
Lyn Brown and
Kerry McCarthy

NOES

Abbott, Ms Diane
Amess, Mr. David
Barrett, John
Beith, rh Sir Alan
Breed, Mr. Colin
Burgon, Colin
Burstow, Mr. Paul
Carmichael, Mr. Alistair
Cash, Mr. William
Challen, Colin
Chope, Mr. Christopher
Corbyn, Jeremy
Davey, Mr. Edward
Davies, Mr. Dai
Davis, rh Mr. David
Dismore, Mr. Andrew
Drew, Mr. David
Fallon, Mr. Michael
Featherstone, Lynne
Foster, Mr. Don
Gerrard, Mr. Neil
Grogan, Mr. John
Hancock, Mr. Mike
Harris, Dr. Evan
Hoey, Kate
Howarth, David
Howarth, rh Mr. George
Hughes, Simon
Jones, Lynne
Joyce, Eric
Keetch, Mr. Paul
Kilfoyle, Mr. Peter
Lazarowicz, Mark
Love, Mr. Andrew
Marshall-Andrews, Mr. Robert
Mitchell, Mr. Austin
Öpik, Lembit
Paisley, rh Rev. Ian
Palmer, Dr. Nick
Price, Adam
Reed, Mr. Andy
Russell, Bob
Simpson, Alan
Thurso, John
Todd, Mr. Mark
Truswell, Mr. Paul
Watson, Mr. Tom
Tellers for the Noes:
John Hemming and
Mr. John Leech

Question accordingly agreed to.

Bill read the Third time and passed, with amendments.

PETITION

Christian Values

Back to top

11.13 pm

Sir Alan Beith (Berwick-upon-Tweed) (LD): I have the privilege of presenting a petition on Christian values from listeners to Premier Christian Radio, which declares that 20,000 Christians have stated that they intend to vote in the forthcoming election in line with Christian values, and that the petitioners believe that “business as usual” has damaged the credibility of Parliament and is unacceptable. The petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons take all steps necessary to restore the credibility of Parliament. The petition, in the name of Mr. Peter Kerridge and Mr. Colin Baynes, is supported by many thousands of forms signed by Premier Christian Radio listeners. In presenting this challenge to both Parliament and candidates in all parties, I believe that the signatories are following the biblical prophetic tradition of calling on those in authority to promote righteousness and to overcome corruption and injustice. The petitioners are citizens of a United Kingdom that I believe is at its best when it combines freedom of religion, for which our forefathers fought, with an acknowledgement of and respect for long-established Christian values—values that are widely shared and respected by people of other faiths and those of no faith. I am pleased to present this petition to the House.

Following is the full text of the petition:

[The Petition of Premier Christian Radio and others,

Declares that 20,000 Christians have stated, in a campaign organised by Premier Christian Radio, that they intend to vote in the forthcoming election in line with Christian values; and that the Petitioners believe that business as usual has damaged the credibility of Parliament and is unacceptable.

The Petitioners therefore request that the House of Commons take all steps necessary to restore the credibility of Parliament.

And the Petitioners remain, etc.]

[P000821]


Go to index