I apologise for interrupting. Is that the case, and could that not be dealt with by defining harm in the way that it is intended, rather than as harm from any source whatever? It feels like a big leap that, if you take out “content”, instead of it meaning the scope of the service in its functionality and content and all the things that we have talked about for the last hour and a half, the suggestion is that it is unworkable because harm suddenly means everything. I am not sure that that is the case. Even if it is, one could find a definition of harm that would make it not the case.
Online Safety Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Kidron
(Crossbench)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 2 May 2023.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Online Safety Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
829 c1441 Session
2022-23Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-10-31 08:21:23 +0000
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2023-05-02/23050232000021
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2023-05-02/23050232000021
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2023-05-02/23050232000021