Internet Watch Foundation response to the Department for Science, Innovation, and Technology consultation:

This provision states that where a complaint relates to a single regulated service or relates to a single provider of one or more regulated services, it is only admissible if OFCOM consider that (a) the complaint is of particular importance, or (b) the complaint relates to the impacts on a particularly large number of users of the service or members of the public. [...] Strongly Agree Neither Disagree Disagree Don’t Know Agree Agree or Strongly Disagree X Requirement 6: A complaint must provide an explanation of how the super-complainant has assessed the current or potential harm caused to users or members of the public. [...] Strongly Agree Neither Disagree Disagree Don’t Know Agree Agree or Strongly Disagree X Question 11: To what extent do you consider that these requirements are necessary to prevent OFCOM undertaking duplicative work when responding to super-complaints? Free text box upto 300 words to feedback Strongly Agree Neither Disagree Disagree Don’t Know Agree Agree or Strongly Disagree X Question 12: To what. [...] Strongly Agree Neither Disagree Disagree Don’t Know Agree Agree or Strongly Disagree X • Requirement 3: If OFCOM decides that the complaint is not eligible for consideration, they must inform the body in writing of that decision and the reasons for it. [...] Strongly Agree Neither Disagree Disagree Don’t Know Agree Agree or Strongly Disagree X Question 17: To what extent do you consider that the eligibility assessment should be split from the rest of the super-complaints process? Optional free-text box of 300 words Strongly Agree Neither Disagree Disagree Don’t Know Agree Agree or Strongly Disagree X Question 18: To what extent do you agree with the f.