Neil Coyle
MP for Bermondsey and Old Southwark · Labour · United Kingdom
“I welcome the Secretary of State back to the Cabinet. It took months of legal wrangling and court time to secure a £1 million refund for leaseholders and £9 million in remediation works on Empire Square in Southwark.”
House of Commons27 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I congratulate the hon. Member for Epsom and Ewell (Helen Maguire) on securing the debate. I will focus my comments on the cycle hire regulations in Southwark.”
House of Commons21 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Then there is Whelan’s, a pub in Rotherhithe with a bike bay outside that overflows regularly with dumped bikes, blocking the way of customers and blocking a bus stop, but most worryingly, blocking the delivery of beer to the pub. A pub without beer cannot stay open very long. It is on a red route, so alternatives are limited.”
House of Commons21 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Southwark council could replicate Ealing and remove bikes at cost to the providers. Constructively, the council could move the bay outside Whelan’s to the verges on the opposite side of Rotherhithe Old Road.”
House of Commons21 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Lime claims it has 400 staff to clear bays and more need directing to those sites, but it says Southwark council sends no one to them. Council inaction is even more inexcusable because Lime has a £500 million fund to provide bays that local authorities can bid for.”
House of Commons21 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“On the point about Westminster council and data, does the hon. Gentleman support the Mayor of London’s request that the new Government regulations require all providers to share information on how many bikes and vehicles they have on the road in our capital, and wherever else they are operated? I obviously have a London interest.”
House of Commons21 October 2026Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
The complete record
1,562 lines on record for Neil Coyle, in date order, each linked to its source. Free to read, without an account. Most recent 500 lines shown. Search to find more. Page 5 of 10.
This is not an official version of UK Parliament proceedings. It reproduces the published record and links to it; the official version is the one UK Parliament publishes.
“People have a misplaced faith that there is a level playing field, and that what they see in Argos and what they can buy on Amazon are regulated in the same way, but sadly they are not, and without my amendments they will not be. Since Committee, I have tidied up the amendments slightly to ensure that they include a power to require the removal of items that are unsafe or counterfeit. That power links to the Government’s list of organisations in clause 144, to ensure that the same bodies as are listed in the Bill are involved. I am trying to help the Government and trying to help more generally, because there are wider benefits to getting this right. UK high streets are struggling.”
House of Commons20 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The chief executive of the Government’s own Office for Product Safety and Standards said last November that “there is too much evidence of non compliant products being sold by third party sellers” online. The National Audit Office and the Public Accounts Committee have also called for action. My amendments are not about new regulations or new pressures on business, which the right hon. Member for North East Somerset (Sir Jacob Rees-Mogg) talked about. They are about enforcing standards and rules for all, both online and on our high streets. The Minister, when he opened this section of the debate, said that he wanted fairness and a level playing field for all. I want that for British consumers and businesses as well.”
House of Commons20 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Trading standards intervened several times, and in January 2020 the Office for Product Safety and Standards also intervened, but that toy range is still on sale online today, five years later. That is unacceptable, and sadly it is not a one-off. The OPSS has issued recall notices due to what it called “serious risks of fire and electric shock” for 90 products that are still on sale on Amazon, and 20 that are still on sale on eBay. There is a fundamental problem with the current regime and system. My amendment seeks to restore confidence. The consumer organisation Which? has also alerted MPs to, among other issues that it has discovered, the problem of energy-saving devices that do not save energy but do present significant risks, including plugs with no fuses. There is unity in the call for greater action.”
House of Commons20 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Research by the British Toy & Hobby Association in 2021 showed that some 60% of children’s toys bought online were unsafe for a child to play with, and 86% were illegal to sell in the UK. That is very disturbing. Some of the problems it discovered were counterfeit goods, fire safety and chemical restriction failures, and packaging or parts that presented choking hazards. They were all products that online marketplaces had been told about but had not removed from sale. In Committee, we had more time for detailed examples. We have less time here, so I will give just one, the toy crocodile story, and I will make it snappy. In July 2018, Amazon was told about a dangerous crocodile toy that was putting children’s lives at risk and was being sold widely online.”
House of Commons20 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Minister has had many representations from organisations about the growth of unsafe and dodgy goods sold online as legit: the British Toy & Hobby Association and Electrical Safety First issued briefings that supported my amendments in Committee. Trading standards also supports greater means of taking action, and briefed in support of the amendment in Committee. At this time of year, it is even more important to act and raise awareness, because many people are buying their Christmas gifts online. Being super organised, I have my seven-year-old’s Christmas presents all safely stashed away at home. I am pretty confident she is not watching tonight and will not be looking for them, although who knows? I genuinely would not buy her gifts online because I am fearful about what happens to those who do trust some online sites.”
House of Commons20 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The coroner’s report goes on to call for greater action, and says: “It is clear that there is an existing, ongoing and future risk of further deaths whilst it continues to be the case that there are no controls or standards governing the sale in the UK of lithium-ion batteries and chargers (and conversion kits) for electric-powered personal vehicles.” There is a call for the Government to act in the face of further problematic items and dangerous goods being sold online. My amendment helps to address the situation, where such items are identified. Not everything we discuss in this place is a life-and-death issue, but this can be.”
House of Commons20 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We have seen fires and other catastrophic damage caused by dodgy goods bought online, and since the Committee completed its considerations, a coroner has specifically cited faulty e-bike chargers in a report on a death. The coroner’s report in September suggested that at least 12 people have died and a further 190 have been injured in faulty e-bike and e-scooter blazes in the UK since 2020 alone, and that is only one area of problematic online sales.”
House of Commons20 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I rise to speak to amendments 226 and 227 in my name, which would introduce a take-down power to ensure that unsafe or counterfeit goods are removed from sale online. We covered this issue in some detail in the Bill Committee, where the problem of dangerous online sales was likened to the wild west, due to the risks to individual consumers and the lack of governance. I am disappointed that we still do not have clarity on how the Government want to tackle this growing concern, because this is fundamentally about safety and the Government failing in their core duty to keep people safe. The Minister knows that unsafe products bought online have caused deaths in the UK.”
House of Commons20 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Can I clarify that when the right hon. Member talks about banks, outlaws and dodgy cash, he talking about high street banks and not Arron Banks?”
House of Commons20 November 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“My constituent’s brother trained and fought alongside UK forces. He escaped murder by the Taliban by fleeing across the border, injured and without papers. Can the Minister confirm how many Afghans have been relocated from third countries under pathways 2 and 3 of the resettlement scheme, and explain why his Government still require those allies to seek new documentation from the men trying to kill them, or to arrive on small boats?”
House of Commons19 September 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In 2011, this Government said that they would help 100,000 disabled people into employment through dedicated personalised support, such as Access to Work. In the 12 years since, the number of disabled people supported by Access to Work has risen from 37,000 to 38,000. Given the Department’s failure and the wider context of cuts, would disabled people not be forgiven for thinking that this is just further cuts dressed up as modernisation?”
House of Commons5 September 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“16. Whether his Department plans to take steps to reduce the time taken by the decision-making process for applications to the Access to Work scheme.”
House of Commons4 September 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“A decade ago, the Government’s Sayce review recommended supporting 100,000 disabled people through specialist employment programmes, but, last year, Access to Work helped just 38,000, and Versus Arthritis and other organisations that support people navigate this difficult system saw a tripling in the delays. When will the Department meet the 100,000 target and end the delays hitting disabled people, employers and the UK economy?”
House of Commons4 September 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Q8. Every single Member of the House is required by law to confirm the true source of a donation before it is accepted or declared. Can the Prime Minister tell us whether he followed all the rules all the time before he took £38,500 of free air travel on 28 April? If so, why does his story keep changing about who paid?”
House of Commons19 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It would be good to hear how the Government will address the concerns of the business community, which has been surprised—let me put it that way—by what the Government have come forward with, in terms of the level of the measures, the fact that the requirements are on the face of the Bill, and the lack of a timeframe to prepare to deliver them. I politely suggest that Ministers take a bit more time to work with the business community before the Bill goes any further to ensure UK businesses are ready, are not hit with further costs, and are prepared to implement the provisions of the Bill.”
House of Commons11 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Sky said that the Government’s impact assessment suggests that the new requirements “will cost UK business £400 million to set up and £1.2 billion in the first year alone.” This is not a benign set of requirements in legislation; it is a costly endeavour. The amendment seeks to give UK businesses space to prepare to implement the provisions and absorb some of the costs, which would not have been in their business plans if they were set some time ago. In an earlier sitting, I asked the Minister about the timeframe, and the amendment attempts to achieve some clarity about that.”
House of Commons11 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I think that this correspondence went to all members of the Committee, but Sky suggests that “measures have shifted away from a high level, principles-based approach”— which was in the consultation initially— “with government opting instead for highly prescriptive requirements on the face of the Bill itself. This change was made without any substantive consultation with businesses, despite the material difference such an approach makes to compliance and implementation costs.” That is from Sky, which has 12,000 jobs focused on this issue, so it is in a better position than smaller companies to get on with that work. Its concern is that the Bill does not do what the Government said it would do, and that new costs will be imposed. It is not just the FSB that has raised concerns about the costs.”
House of Commons11 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In an earlier sitting, we heard the Minister tell us that some provisions would be immediate and some provisions would be for new contracts, not for existing contracts, but business organisations and representative organisations were unaware of the Government’s plans, despite the need to prepare to implement provisions and allow for the costs of new regulations to take effect on businesses. Businesses have said that the Bill goes further than the Government’s initial consultation expected, including on things such as clauses 245 to 273 and reminders.”
House of Commons11 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I beg to move amendment 136, in clause 316, page 221, line 25, at end insert— “(3) Sections 245 to 273 come into force from April 2026.” This amendment provides an explicit implementation period for the subscription contract provisions. The amendment suggests the need for an explicit implementation period for the subscription contract provisions debated earlier in clauses 245 to 273. That comes about for several reasons. The Government say and Ministers tell us that they have consulted businesses, but I note that the Federation of Small Businesses has raised concerns about the provisions in the Bill, including timing and coverage, as have Sky and other larger organisations. There seems to be a concern that there is no specific time or date.”
House of Commons11 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“If this is about balance and fairness, businesses are right to say that there is an annual reminder system for other regulated services, such as broadband and telephones. The Bill proposes a six-monthly reminder system for new services, so is the Minister saying that other services should be better regulated and that the reminder system should be more frequent to help consumers get fairness, or is he saying that businesses are being treated better in some circumstances than the Bill will allow? I am confused about which bit of Government policy he does not support in that domain.”
House of Commons11 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I think the point has been made that businesses need space to make sure that they can implement what the Government are asking them to do without undue cost, while also trying to retain the benefits of the greater consumer provisions. I hope that the Minister’s meetings and further consultation garner better business confidence in the Government’s plans, which the other place will see later. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Question proposed, That the clause stand part of the Bill.”
House of Commons11 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Further to that point of order, Dame Maria. The Under-Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, the hon. Member for Sutton and Cheam agreed in our proceedings to send a letter and told the Committee that a letter had been sent. No letter has been received and no letter is in the Library. Will the Minister please send the letter as promised?”
House of Commons11 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“We can compare them with some of the other contributors in the other Chamber, including Lord Lebedev, whom the intelligence services said should not be there; Lord Archer, who has never spoken and never bothered to turn up; Lord Bamford, who has made five contributions in a decade—one contribution for each £1 million contribution he has made to the Conservative party—and the Earl of Rosslyn, who has spoken once since—”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Bishop of Southwark has spoken about children detained under Home Office plans that he called “most alarming” and “unedifying”, the Home Office’s failure to tackle sexual exploitation and modern slavery, and other issues. It is hard to disagree with those contributions; I welcome them. One backer of this debate said that bishops have been intervening pointedly in politics. I would be disappointed if the Church were not standing up on these issues and did not take a view on the Government’s devaluing of human life. I would be disappointed if it did not request that, rather than crossing the road, we should be the good Samaritan and intervene to help others where we can. It is disappointing that this debate is focused on one group in the House of Lords, based on their faith, rather than their role.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I welcome Bishop Christopher of Southwark’s work here in Westminster and in Southwark, where the cathedral was integral to the rebuild after the horrific terror attack at London Bridge and Borough Market. The work of the cathedral, Bishop Christopher and Andrew Nunn, the dean, who is now retired, was fundamental in ensuring that we rebuilt quickly. The love and strength with which they served was commendable, and I am glad to have seen it and been part of it. The Bishop of Southwark has recently spoken about the 1 million people waiting for council homes. He has supported the Bishop of St Albans’ plan to prevent leaseholders from paying fees to remove dangerous cladding, and the Archbishop of Canterbury’s call for a 10-year plan in partnership with other countries to tackle the refugee crisis and human trafficking.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I represent an extremely diverse, vibrant central London community, which includes at least five mosques, and this is a non-issue for the vast majority of the people I serve. Week in, week out, I deal with issues to do with housing, the cost of living and Home Office failures. I am proud to work with peers and bishops on my constituents’ top concerns, which the bishops see reflected in their congregations. They share those values, and I respect that. I speak in unity with the other representatives of Southwark: my right hon. and learned Friend the Member for Camberwell and Peckham (Ms Harman), my hon. Friend the Member for Dulwich and West Norwood (Helen Hayes) and Bishop Christopher of Southwark, who sits in the House of Lords. I am proud to share a platform with them in representing and serving Southwark.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Bishop of Durham yesterday described the Government’s Rwanda plans as “horrifying” and “immoral”, and I share that sentiment. Although there are so few bishops in the Lords, they have been crucial to narrow recent wins. Their votes have been decisive—I thank them for their service—including on the Government’s plan to sack nurses for daring to strike in favour of their employment rights and pay, which their union voted for. Lords should be commended for serving until 4 am, rather than being told that their contribution is unwelcome. I also believe that Parliament should be on top of issues facing our constituents. I am sure that, in Edinburgh, they talk of nothing other than Church of England bishops sitting in the House of Lords, but I have had three requests to be here today.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I would prefer an upper Chamber with regional representation, elected council leaders and directly elected Mayors, whether or not I agree with their politics. I am mindful that a bishop at least represents a diocese, which gives them—more than others they sit with—a constituency, of sorts, to reflect in the House of Lords. I am also mindful that bishops are seen as the spring chickens—the upstarts and whippersnappers—of the House of Lords, because they are forced to retire at 70, which is younger than some of their peers, who, of course, are also peers. The bishops’ contributions come from their expertise and experience, are based on years of service, and are underpinned by values that are integral to what they bring to our upper Chamber.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Thank you, Mr Davies, for calling me in this debate. To make it clear, I speak in a personal capacity as someone who would welcome the formal extension of invitations to sit in the House of Lords to representatives of other faiths: imams, rabbis and representatives of other Christian denominations. I serve a community with two cathedrals and was proud to attend the 175th anniversary of St George’s Cathedral, which is a Catholic cathedral, just this week. I support reform of the House of Lords, but just targeting bishops for removal would leave the House full of Tory donors and political patronage, and that is not a House I would be happy to see. This debate puts form before function. Frankly, the composition of the upper House is less of an issue than its role.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I would sooner hear more from the Bishop of Southwark and the rest of the Lords Spiritual from the Church of England here and elsewhere, rather than the Prime Minister’s shameless hypocrisy yesterday in quoting from Matthew, chapter 25, at the service for the NHS’s 75th anniversary.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Certainly, Mr Davies. I will move on. The point I was making is that there are others I feel should be a more legitimate target for removal from the House of Lords. The bishops should not be targeted purely because of the denomination they represent, their understanding of British values, how they demonstrate that through their faith, the communities they serve and their experience working in churches and dioceses. I stood for election to help to tackle the real problems in my community and those that the country faces, not to bash bishops—Members can do that in their own time—or get consumed in an academic political debate that makes no meaningful difference to the people I serve.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Does the Minister’s sadness on that issue extend to those who seek to gag Church leaders from speaking about immigration? I am unaware of a nativity story that includes an innkeeper telling Mary and Joseph to take their donkey to Rwanda.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“4. What recent assessment she has made of the effectiveness of the Crown Prosecution Service in ensuring access to justice for victims of crime.”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The Ministry of Justice’s early legal advice pilot scheme has just reported. It ran for five months, cost £5 million and supported a sum total of just three people. Instead of the Attorney General and the Government trying to reinvent the wheel by making it square, why do they not deliver better access to justice by supporting more people through legal aid?”
House of Commons6 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Do the Government intend to provide new impact assessments to reflect what the Minister has just said—?”
House of Commons4 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Amendment 118 would make a person marketing goods online a trader for the purposes of the Act. Amendment 119 would make it an unfair commercial practice to sell goods online unless the specified safety requirements have been complied with. Amendment 123 should be self—”
House of Commons4 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Thank you, Mr McCabe. It is a pleasure to serve with you in the Chair. In speaking to the amendments, may I thank the organisations that have contributed? There is a whole range of them, but I would particularly like to thank the British Toy and Hobby Association and Electrical Safety First, not least because they are based in the best constituency in the country: Bermondsey and Old Southwark. The other organisations include Which? and trading standards bodies. There is a range of amendments in my name covering a range of issues. They have at their core the need to protect British consumers, British businesses and British standards. I want to air a lot of issues. I hope I will not need to force votes and I am keen to hear what the Minister has to say in response.”
House of Commons4 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I beg to move amendment 118, in clause 217, page 146, line 11, at end insert— “(c) a person marketing P’s goods for sale online.” This amendment makes a person marketing goods online a trader, for the purposes of this Act.”
House of Commons4 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It is insulting for them to have others trading on profitable sites such as Amazon and others with contempt for UK law, in a way that would be tackled if it was happening in a physical shop or even down a market. The truth is that Del Boy’s products would meet higher standards than some of those sold online. Platforms have been accommodating counterfeit, hooky, shoddy and dangerous goods for far too long.”
House of Commons4 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Frankly, it is a bit shocking that some of these amendments are necessary, but they are. The British Toy and Hobby Association survey “Don’t Toy with Children’s Safety” highlights some significant concerns. The toy industry is worth £3.2 billion to the UK economy—it is a massive sector. The survey showed that, in 2021, 60% of the toys tested were unsafe for a child to play with, and 86% of the toys freely available online were illegal to sell in the UK. That is appalling for lots of reasons, including because some of it is counterfeit. We touched on this point in previous debates. British companies trade legitimately in goods that they are licensed to provide and make. They hold a trademark.”
House of Commons4 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“In its US annual report a couple of years ago, Amazon acknowledged that it was, in its own words, “unable to prevent sellers in our stores or through other stores from selling unlawful, counterfeit, pirated or stolen goods”. I use Amazon to represent online marketplaces more generally, because of the familiarity of customers. They believe it is a reputable organisation and trust that it meets standards, but that is not the case. Of course, Amazon also has an ongoing battle with the GMB on recognition, which it should have resolved some time ago. Ministers should have been supportive on that issue: they say they want a high-skills, high-wage economy, and that is what trade unions set about to deliver, and that is certainly what the GMB is seeking, in partnership with the Amazon workforce.”
House of Commons4 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“715.] This group of amendments, and particularly amendment 124, help deliver what the Minister said he would like to achieve, and what I hope the Bill will achieve by the point it completes its progress through both Houses. Fundamentally, it comes back to what customers believe. My constituents, and customers, believe whether they are shopping at Argos on the Old Kent Road or on Amazon online that the goods they are buying will meet the required UK standards. That is simply not what is happening. Some 90% of toy sales online are through Amazon, eBay and AliExpress. I have referred to Amazon previously, and I do not want to pick on Amazon, but it is one of the big three. It has done some work to try to address the concerns of organisations and trade bodies, but it is simply not enough.”
House of Commons4 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“The main amendment that I wish to speak to is amendment 124, and the takedown power to require the removal from online trade of counterfeit or dangerous products. This would deliver, in part, what the Minister, the hon. Member for Thirsk and Malton, said on Second Reading of the Online Sale of Goods (Safety) Bill, in response to my hon. Friend the Member for Gateshead (Ian Mearns), when pressed about taking items offline. He said that, “we should go further than that and require marketplaces to ensure that such products are not on their sites at all, ever, and that they check to ensure that they do not appear and, indeed, remove retailers who have transgressed.” —[ Official Report , 20 January 2023; Vol. 726, c.”
House of Commons4 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“For those not familiar with the genre, that is the third film of Sergio Leone’s trilogy, and Clint played an antihero. He takes Tuco in to claim the reward, and then shoots him down from the noose, in order to claim further, higher rewards down the line—so that is an intriguing analogy from the Minister. The first film in the trilogy was “A Fistful of Dollars”. I am here with “For a Few Dollars More”—the second in the trilogy—to offer a better system, with some improvements to what the Government have put forward, to try to do a better job. For those who are familiar with “The Good, the Bad and the Ugly”, there are only two kinds of people in this world—those who have seen the film, and those who have not.”
House of Commons4 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Amendment 122 defines an online marketplace and safety requirements, in line with the bodies who have contributed who are still concerned about where things are at in the Bill. I think the Government’s original aim was to publish a draft Bill; this Bill took some organisations by surprise, and I think a lot are playing catch-up, hoping that issues will be aired here and that Ministers will be meeting with them soon, ahead of the Lords stages. They hope to see a bit more progress on some measures in the Bill. Most accept the need for this legislation, but very few seem convinced that the Bill does the complete job. Mr McCabe, you were not in the Chair for our evidence sessions, where we had all the “wild west” references. The Minister suggested a Clint Eastwood in “The Good, the Bad and the Ugly” character to help take action.”
House of Commons4 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“It will surprise no one that I wish to speak to these amendments; I am sorry for being rusty. Having been on Bill Committees previously and managed to get amendments through, or at least poached by the Government, I feel embarrassed to have slipped up on this one. I went through the amendments previously, so I hope Members can copy and paste from previous debates. Amendment 123 is self-explanatory. Amendment 120 would make it a misleading action to sell goods online without taking reasonable steps to ensure that the goods have not been subject to a recall. Amendment 124 would create the takedown power—the power to remove dangerous or counterfeit goods from online sales. Amendment 121 defines reasonable steps.”
House of Commons4 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Ministers claim that they want to make the UK the “safest” place in the world to be online, and here are the means to deliver that laudable aim.”
House of Commons4 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“One meeting I had with the Met revealed that more than 300 requests to take down videos had been ignored by YouTube. They included calling for revenge and the murder of specific individuals in revenge attacks between gangs in London. The police should have a stronger power than that, but as with this legislation, the power to request that something is removed is insufficient; it must be the power to compel the removal, similar to—for those familiar with local authority powers—a cease and desist order by a planning body. That would be a comparable power if the Government are keen to have something stronger than that offered in the current legislation. I hope that amendment 124 helps British businesses, jobs, standards and customers and helps the Government —that is why I am here today.”
House of Commons4 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“I hope that amendment 121 in particular, but also other amendments in this group, are useful to the Government in delivering their aims and defending customers and businesses. The wording of amendment 124 is crucial; I hope that the Minister will come back to this when he responds to the debate. It would “require the removal”. It is not a request to remove a product; it is a requirement to remove a product. It could be put in the hands of all the bodies in clause 143, with penalties and timely action to prevent a fatality if this is not done quickly enough. The use of the word “require” is deliberate, because the power to request is in other legislation. For example, the police can request the removal of video footage from YouTube that is incitement to violence or hatred, is homophobic or is incitement to violence between gangs.”
House of Commons4 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗
“Maybe it is still in the internal post. I thank the Minister for the letter; it would be nice to know what it says. The point is that the Bill does not make clear how customers will secure redress. It presents a convoluted route of multiple agencies and potential court action that people simply will not want to take. My amendment does not go as far as some have suggested. It is a moderate suggestion. There have been suggestions that there is full and shared liability for platforms for any product sold and that some of the measures should be retrospectively implemented so that there should be penalties on those who have sold goods that they know to be counterfeit or dangerous going back for years.”
House of Commons4 July 2023Contains Parliamentary information licensed under the Open Parliament Licence v3.0Source ↗