I certainly agree with the noble Lord, Lord Bethell, on that point. It is absolutely right to talk about the danger of commercialisation and how it is such a driver of misinformation and disinformation; I thank him for drawing that to the Committee’s attention. I also thank my noble friend Lady Healy for her remarks, and her reflection that these amendments are not a question of restricting free speech and debate; they are actually about supporting free speech and debate but in a safe and managed way.
5 pm
The Minister gave the Committee the assurance that the Bill in its current form tackles the most egregious forms of disinformation and misinformation. If only it were so, we would not have had cause to bring forward these amendments. I again refer to the point in the Minister’s response when, as I anticipated, he referred to the false communications offence in Clause 160. I repeat the point gently but firmly to the Minister that this just does not address the amplification point that we seek to focus on. One might argue that perhaps it is more liberal and proportionate to allow misinformation and disinformation but to focus on tackling their amplification. That is where our efforts should be.
With those comments, with thanks to the Minister and other noble Lords, and in the hope that the Minister will have the opportunity to reflect on the points raised in this debate, I beg leave to withdraw.