Are ministers rowing back from well publicised plans to improve internet safety in Britain? Are they running scared of upsetting @realDonaldTrump post Brexit? A short thread…
2. First a re-cap: after years of loud but largely meaningless rhetoric, @DCMS published its Online Harms white paper in April. It proposed that all major social media platforms be made subject to a new "statutory duty of care" covering a wide range of net-related harms: 
3.The concept, developed by @willperrin and Lorna Woods of @EssexLawSchool via the @CarnegieUKTrust , is a clever one. Crucially, it regulates outcomes rather than inputs, thus avoiding the need to codify the day-to-day work of tech firms - something all agree is impossible
4. Duties of care underpin much UK public sphere regulation. They essentially say, we don't care how you do it (you're the innovators!) but if you cause/enable a specified harm (a fall from a balcony in a hotel or a hate crime on the net, for eg) you will be liable
5. The white paper was widely welcomed. @DamianCollins
@annelongfield @NSPCC and many others all applauded it. Britain had invented the net and would now lead the way in regulating it, said the then SoS @JeremyWrightPPC
telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/04/0…
@annelongfield @NSPCC and many others all applauded it. Britain had invented the net and would now lead the way in regulating it, said the then SoS @JeremyWrightPPC
telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/04/0…
6. What's more, the new system would have teeth - specifically the ability to fine offenders. Labour's @tom_watson suggested fines of up to 4% of turnover. Wright was not specific but said fines for those causing harms would be "substantial"...
7. So where are we now 7mths on from the white paper's launch and 2mths on from the close of the consultation period? It's here the story looks to be about to take a turn for the worst....
8. A Bill paving the way for the white paper to become law was expected to be announced in yesterday's #QueensSpeech . But in the end all we got was the single line, "My Ministers will continue to develop proposals to improve internet safety..."
9. The supporting briefing doc offers little solace. It talks only of "draft legislation for pre-legislative scrutiny" (not a Bill) by early next year and plays down the idea of fines. Indeed, so concerned is it to pull those teeth it repeats it twice:
10. Why the apparent cooling? After all, Germany has already implemented its NetzDG legislation, which requires all illegal content to be removed within 24hrs, and France's Avia Law, which does similar, is almost on the statute book. Both have very sharp fiscal teeth…
11. The new SoS @NickyMorgan01 will hopefully be able to answer this when she appears before @DamianCollins and the
@CommonsCMS tomorrow.
Some suspect ministers are running scared of @realDonaldTrump ahead of a possible US/UK trade deal. Can she put our minds to rest?
@CommonsCMS tomorrow.
Some suspect ministers are running scared of @realDonaldTrump ahead of a possible US/UK trade deal. Can she put our minds to rest?
12. The tech companies are known to be lobbying hard in Washington, urging Trump and US lawmakers to use trade agreements to preserve their very limited liability. Are Ms Morgan and her officials @DCMS aware of this?
13. Last, how long can we claim to be leading the world in internet regulation when others (including the EU) are already overtaking us? In short, are we to be a rule setter or rule taker when it comes to online safety?
