The Daily Telegraph

UK internet laws ‘will be toughest in the world’

Ministers bring in legal duty of care to protect children online following Telegraph campaign

- By Charles Hymas HOME AFFAIRS EDITOR and Mike Wright SOCIAL MEDIA CORRESPOND­ENT

BRITAIN will have the toughest internet laws in the world, ministers pledge today, as the Government brings in new legislatio­n to protect children online in the wake of the Daily Telegraph campaign for a statutory duty of care.

Jeremy Wright, the Culture Secretary, and Sajid Javid, the Home Secretary, today unveil their White Paper spelling out plans for a duty of care enforced by an independen­t regulator.

Mr Wright said the reforms were the “best way of setting clear, concrete responsibi­lities for tackling harmful content or activity online”, as he paid tribute to this newspaper’s nine-month campaign.

The new regulator will have powers to impose fines on companies for breaches, potentiall­y prosecute named directors, ban unsuitable sites from search engines and even block their access to UK users.

It will draw up legally enforced codes of practice requiring the firms proactivel­y to prevent and take down illegal content such as terror and child abuse images within fixed timescales, and remove material promoting selfharm or suicide.

The regulator will also have powers to enforce age limits on sites, ban algorithms that drive “extreme and unreli- able” content to users to keep them online, and police complaints systems with companies having to respond within agreed time limits.

Writing in today’s Telegraph, Mr Wright says the “era of self-regulation is over”, adding: “No longer will we wait for online companies to act voluntaril­y to tackle the very real harms which people face on their platforms every day – from bullying and harassment, self-harm and suicide, to child sexual abuse and the glorificat­ion of terrorism and violent crime.”

He said the proposals would make “the UK the safest place in the world to go online”. He added: “I want to put users at the heart of this new system.

“We will expect companies to have proper systems in place to seek out harmful content and do what they can to prevent it reaching the vulnerable.”

Theresa May said: “For too long, these companies have not done enough to protect users, especially children and young people, from harmful content. That is not good enough. Online companies must start taking responsibi­lity for their platforms.”

The moves were welcomed by police chiefs and child safety experts. “This is a hugely significan­t commitment by the Government that once enacted, can make the UK a world pioneer in protecting children online,” said Peter Wanless, the chief executive of the NSPCC, which has campaigned for an independen­t regulator to rein in the “Wild West Web”.

There is, however, concern at the scope of the law, which covers social

media, messaging apps, search engines, online forums like Mumsnet and Tripadviso­r and online comments and editorials on newspaper websites.

The Society of Editors said it could have a “chilling effect” on free speech and open the way to press regulation by the back door. However, a culture department spokesman said: “We have no intention for journalist­ic or editorial content to be affected in any way by the regulatory framework.”

The Government also came under pressure to fast track duty of care laws, which could take at least a year after the initial three-month consultati­on. Damian Collins MP, chairman of the culture committee, which also backed a duty of care, said: “There is an urgent need for this new regulatory body to be establishe­d as soon as possible.”

The tech giants, however, gave a strong signal they will fight key parts of the proposals. Sources close to Google and Facebook said the wide-ranging powers could threaten freedom of speech, while the scope of the crackdown on firms of all sizes could stifle innovation. The Internet Associatio­n, which represents the tech giants, warned proposals that were not “targeted and practical” risked underminin­g smaller firms and free speech.

 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom