Internet Watch Foundation

HC Deb 09 February 1999 vol 325 cc207-8W

Mr. Coaker

To ask the Secretary of State for Trade and Industry when he intends to publish the review of the Internet Watch Foundation; and if he will make a statement. [70364]

Mr. Wills

Copies of the review of the Internet Watch Foundation, conducted by KPMG and Denton hall, were placed in the Libraries of the House of Commons and the House of Lords this morning. The report is also available on the Department's website. The report commends the success of the IWF since its inception in 1996, and makes recommendations for improvement to keep pace with the rapid developments taking place in the Internet industry.

The IWF's structure, hotline operations and relationship with the Internet industry, Metropolitan Police and National Criminal Intelligence Service were all examined as part of the review. Work on developing rating systems, future activities and funding arrangements were also considered.

Findings show a steady increase in the number of reports of potentially illegal material received and processed by the IWF, mainly from outside the UK. Other key points include: there were 453 actionable reports of illegal material on the Internet from December 1996 until end of August 1998; the IWF has made an important contribution in tackling child pornography, which accounts for almost 90 per cent. of material that is assessed by the Foundation as illegal; the IWF has played a leading role in developing content rating and filtering systems for Internet content that is legal, but that may be harmful or offensive; and low public and industry awareness of the IWF (particularly among non-users of the Internet).

The report puts forward a series of recommendations, including: raising awareness of the IWF through a publicity campaign, to include: printed and electronic material for current and new users; web pages with hot links to the IWF site; mailings and promotional material with CD Roms; further work on developing rating systems and filtering technologies and deciding how to tackle real time Internet chat services which could pose a danger to children; drawing in UK Internet Service Providers not tied into IWF; improving Police/IWF communication; for example, through developing working procedures and regular formal feedback; further work on potentially illegal adult pornography; better co-operation with watchdogs responsible for illegal material other than child pornography: for example, financial scams, copyright infringement and racism; and improved management structure and funding, including a higher representation of public bodies and charities on the Policy Board.

The report demonstrates the IWF's success to date in dealing with complaints about child pornography on-line and in developing content rating and filtering systems which will enable people to filter out legal, but offensive material from their PCs. But the Report also shows that a good deal more work needs to be done. I welcome the report's recommendations for the further development of the IWF and encourage the Internet Industry and the IWF to consider them carefully as a basis for developing the IWF's work in future.