Children’s Privacy Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Home Office
Tuesday 6th January 2015

(9 years, 4 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Bates Portrait Lord Bates
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am grateful to my noble friend for that question. Section 1.8 of the Ofcom code refers to the protection of children and that is mirrored by the code of ethics under the self-regulatory system. What we need to do is ensure that that is working and that people are protected. At the same time, there is a need for a balance on the one hand between large crowd scenes in which children might be involved, or the premiere of a movie where a child star might be putting themselves in the public domain, and situations where privacy is involved. A fine balance needs to be achieved.

Baroness Uddin Portrait Baroness Uddin (Non-Afl)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, does the noble Lord accept that those who have disabilities are still having huge difficulties in coming forward and reporting child sexual abuse or the need for protection? Will he assure the House that in all aspects of dealing with this matter—whether with regard to the media, the social justice arena or the law—he will take on board the specific needs of those with disabilities, in particular those with autism?

Lord Bates Portrait Lord Bates
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

This applies to everybody equally, and those with disabilities should come forward. Those guilty of abuse should be prosecuted. There is a straight line between what we are talking about, which may be general intrusion such as the publication of a photograph, and, of course, the publication of sexualised images of children, on which the full weight of the criminal law needs rightly to come down.