I am grateful to the hon. Lady for what she says, and she asks a fair question. One reason why I did not come to the House before now was that I sought to explore exactly what we might be able to do either to avoid this delay altogether or to minimise it. Perhaps it would help if I explained why I think that six months is roughly the appropriate time. Let me set out what has to happen now: we need to go back to the European Commission, and the rules under the relevant directive say that there must be a three-month standstill period after we have properly notified the regulations to the Commission. If it wishes to look into this in more detail—I hope that it will not—there could be a further month of standstill before we can take matters further, so that is four months. We will then need to re-lay the regulations before the House. As she knows, under the negative procedure, which is what these will be subject to, there is a period during which they can be prayed against, which accounts for roughly another 40 days. If we add all that together, we come to roughly six months. As she will recognise, if we could proceed quicker than that, we would, but I do not believe that that will be feasible, so it is right that I am realistic at this stage.
Online Pornography: Age Verification
Proceeding contribution from
Jeremy Wright
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Thursday, 20 June 2019.
It occurred during Ministerial statement on Online Pornography: Age Verification.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
662 c372 Session
2017-19Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-10-31 15:04:23 +0000
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2019-06-20/19062026000388
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2019-06-20/19062026000388
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2019-06-20/19062026000388