Reply to post:

UK's lords want more details on adult website check plans


"The Digital Econonomy Bill has been passed by MPs and is now due to enter the committee stage, which will examine the legislation.

But the committee said the Bill does not spell out "how the age-verification regime will actually work."

Guidelines for age checks are to be drafted by an "as yet-to-be-designated regulator" which could adversely affect the ability of the House "effectively to scrutinise the legislation", it said."

This is what I love (sarcasm) about our governments - that a bill can pass through a house without the people voting for it having any idea how it will actually work or what the implications will be. How can you honestly say you are representing your constituents and their interests when you can't even say how they will be affected?

When it's up to an un-elected group of nobles and holy men to inject some sense then someone really needs to have a good hard look at how well those men and women elected to represent the 'common' person are really doing their jobs.

That said, I actually don't think the House of Lords is an inherently bad idea as these people are not career politicians and are not, therefore entirely submerged in that particular soup. If the representatives of the people actually represented the interests of the people then they just wouldn't be needed but apparently they are.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019