Asked by
To ask Her Majesty’s Government what action they are taking to
protect children online who have been groomed into filming their
own abuse.
(LD)
My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on
the Order Paper and declare an interest as a champion of the
Internet Watch Foundation and a vice-president of Barnardo’s.
The Minister of State, Home Office () (Con)
My Lords, the rise in self-generated indecent images of children
is extremely concerning. These images can have devastating
impacts on young people, putting them at risk of blackmail,
coercion and, of course, further abuse. Through the online harms
Bill we intend to publish a new duty of care for online companies
towards their users, overseen by an independent regulator. Our
response during the pandemic includes amplifying messages to
stakeholders to help children to stay safe online.
(LD)
My Lords, professionals working in child protection, such as
those at Barnardo’s and the NSPCC, have been raising concerns
about the impact of the lockdown on children, which has created a
perfect storm that has led to an increase in online child abuse.
The Internet Watch Foundation has warned of a rise in
self-generated illegal images of young children which it has had
to take down, up almost 50% on last year. What steps are the
Government taking to ensure that there is a renewed focus on
prevention and the protection of children, who are spending more
time online, to guarantee that they are properly supported with
high-quality online safety advice, funding and resources?
(Con)
I agree wholeheartedly with the noble Baroness: she is absolutely
right that the figures she quotes are staggering and worrying. I
commend the Internet Watch Foundation for the work it is doing. I
know that officials are engaging very closely with the IWF to
explore what more we can do to tackle this sort of online
grooming. I also know that RSE in schools is another area through
which we can engage with children to prevent this sort of thing
happening in the first place.
(Lab)
My Lords, the UK Safer Internet Centre recently reported that in
one week alone earlier this year 700 young girls, most of them
between 11 and 13 years old, were coerced into filming their own
abuse and posting it online, where it is easily shared, repeating
the trauma and victimisation time and again. What progress have
the Government made in getting social media companies to take
down all such images, including those that have been shared, as
they are reported? Which companies are not complying with this
process? Can the Minister also confirm that funding for the UK
Safer Internet Centre has been secured as a result of the
Chancellor’s Statement last week?
(Con)
I cannot confirm the answer to the noble Lord’s question about
the funding for the UK Safer Internet Centre, but I will confirm
it to him in writing. The figure that he quoted of 700 girls in
one week is just staggering in its magnitude. Of course, this is
a problem of this generation: my children were certainly not
subjected to this type of coercion, either by their peers or by
groomers online. This is the double concern. I know that Five
Eyes are working together with some of the internet providers and
social media sites and that the Home Secretary has been engaged
in this work, specifically with Facebook.
(Non-Afl)
My Lords, in April 2017, three and a half years ago, the Digital
Economy Act included measures to protect children online. In
2019, the Government decided not to commence these measures,
wanting instead to wait for the online harms Bill. A year on, we
are still waiting for that Bill. When will it be published, and
can the Minister explain to the House how this three and a half
year-delay is the Government seeking to protect children online?
(Con)
I cannot disagree with the noble Baroness that the sooner the
online harms Bill comes our way, the better. I certainly know
that the response to the consultation will be published very
shortly. The sooner we can get on with this, the absolute better
for our children.
(Con) [V]
My Lords, is there any way for the authorities to monitor
communications with children who are in local authority care and
particularly vulnerable to the offer of a relationship, and in
this way prevent the grooming altogether?
(Con)
I have to say to my noble and learned friend that in local
authorities, particularly when local authority systems are being
used, there are firewalls to prevent some types of abuse, but if
a child has a smart phone with such things as Messenger or
Snapchat on it, it is incredibly difficult for local authorities
to keep tabs on children who are at the end of such coercive
behaviour. The noble Baroness, Lady Kennedy of Cradley, talked
about the online harms Bill next year: that is going to be
crucial, because it will place a duty of care on service
providers and social media platforms to actually protect
vulnerable people from this sort of thing.
(LD) [V]
My Lords, following up on the Minister’s reply to the noble Lord,
, she may be aware that industry compliance
in taking down child abuse images fell by 89% in the first month
of lockdown. What tools are the Government using, or threatening
to use, to ensure that social media companies such as Facebook
design and deliver platforms and services that put child
protection front and centre?
(Con)
I can guess at several of the factors, but one might be the
ever-increasing use of encryption, so that not only can parents
not see what their children are doing, but nor can the local
authority or, actually, the internet providers themselves. This
is at the heart of what the Home Secretary and Five Eyes partners
are trying to discourage going forward.
(Con) [V]
My Lords, following up on the question from the noble Baroness,
Lady Walmsley, my noble friend may be aware that Facebook and
Facebook-owned apps such as Instagram and WhatsApp account for
more than 50% of online abuse. What conversations are
specifically taking place with Facebook in relation to its
platforms being the preferred method and platform for this kind
of abuse?
(Con)
Well, Messenger, which is a Facebook app, had not to date been
encrypted, but Facebook has announced its intention to encrypt
Messenger from, I think, next year. This is precisely the type of
discussion that the Home Secretary and Five Eyes partners are
having with Facebook, because not only will law enforcement
bodies and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children
in the US not be able to look at what is going on there, but nor
will Facebook itself, and that is the crucial thing here.
(Lab Co-op)
My Lords, these are horrific crimes. Frankly, is it not time to
give the directors of the companies that are hosting these images
legal civil and criminal responsibility for the content they
host? I suspect we would see much swifter action if this were the
case, and nothing short of this will do to deal with this abuse.
(Con)
My Lords, although I cannot give the actual details of the online
harms Bill, that duty of care will push that responsibility on to
those internet service providers and platforms to do just that,
to protect our children.
(Non-Afl)
The question we really want answered is whether the Home Office
is pressing for, and the Government are going to provide
parliamentarians with, the opportunity to vote in Parliament to
create criminal sanctions against the internet companies that are
failing to deal with this depravity.
(Con)
I certainly look forward to having those discussions with
parliamentarians in your Lordships’ House, many of whom have such
expertise in this area.
