FREE SPEECH
Consumer Protection Bill - Thursday, 29 January Lord Gallacher: One takes Clause 24 as a whole. It is certainly drawn very widely, and one accepts that in the circumstances to which the clause addresses itself, width is very necessary.
However, reading the various subsec- tions, one begins to feel that the cumulative effect of this clause is to give little or no protection, and indeed to exonerate completely the advertiser from any responsibility for what may or may not appear in his advertisements.
For example, when we come to sub- section (4) (d) we get the words 'for the most part' and, as I said, on reading the clause as a whole it seemed to us that it might be desirable slightly to narrow the width of exemption offered by Clause 24. The purpose of the amendment is to achieve just that. The narrowing of the clause in the minor way suggested in the amendment would constitute an addi- tional defence for consumers and there- fore it is worthy of consideration. When I was thinking about what one might say further in support of this amendment I chanced upon a report in my local paper only last week that a vacancy offered in a Job Centre led a young woman into prostitution at a massage parlour. So a case was brought to court and subsequently sent for trial on that basis. I am happy to assure the Committee that so far as the young lady is concerned the case had a fairly happy ending, because it is also reported that she is now pursuing successfully a career in the Civil Service.
Previous page
