Select committee: Public Accounts Committee
Conclusion 24
Thirteenth Report - Preparedness for online safety regulation
Published 21 Feb 2024
Addressed to HM Treasury
Public Accounts Committee Preparedness for online safety regulation All items in this report Report on parliament.uk ↗ Inquiry on parliament.uk ↗
Conclusion (the committee's words)
Ofcom told us that some recruits have returned to industry, but that retention generally is not an issue at the moment.56 It told us that it is confident in its ability to attract the necessary talent, with people attracted by Ofcom’s mission and the opportunity to achieve change to online safety. We asked Ofcom about the salaries it is offering. As an independent regulator, Ofcom is able to set its own salaries. Ofcom told us that the salaries it offers are what is required to attract the necessary skills, but that they are not that much higher than elsewhere in the public sector.57
From: Public Accounts Committee, Thirteenth Report - Preparedness for online safety regulation (HC 73), 21 February 2024
Government response
The government responded to the whole report on 3 May 2024 (deadline 21 April 2024).
Summary written by Accountability Index from the government's response. It is not the government's own words.The government agrees with the Committee's recommendations on codes of practice deadlines, compliance monitoring, the fee regime and evaluation, and disagrees with those on complaint feedback and skills audits.
- On codes of practice, the government agrees and states that Ofcom "is on track" to submit its illegal harms and protection of children Codes to the Secretary of State by 26 April 2025.
- On feedback to complainants, the government disagrees, stating that the Act "does not empower Ofcom to adjudicate on individual complaints"; these should go to the provider.
- On the fee regime, the government agrees. Ofcom will consult publicly in Summer 2024, with the aim of implementing the fees regime in the 2026-27 financial year.
- On skills audits, the government disagrees, stating that both organisations "already have effective workforce planning processes", which fulfil the intent of the recommendation.