I thought it would be ironic to link the Daily Mail article discussing this as the Mail is (in)famously hypocritical over porn, they are campaigning for “opt in” only and are generally anti-porn, but not when it comes to getting customers to their website for the advertisers – the irony is their own site would likely be blocked due to their porn content. Their paper is very conservative but the website is full of celeb pictures including naked stuff.

Article:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2143684/Internet-provider-TalkTalk-offer-porn-site-opt-4million-families.html

Examples of hypocrisy:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2144145/Madonna-photograph-posing-naked-bed-smoking-cigarette-sells-15-000.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-558809/Nude-photo-Carla-Bruni-sold-mystery-bidder-45-500.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2072297/Lindsay-Lohan-Playboy-leak-Magazine-released-early-says-Hugh-Hefner.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2038552/Nude-Israelis-float-Dead-Sea-Spencer-Tunick-photo-shoot.html

I won’t paste any more but you get the idea, it’s an amusing debate, frankly even if I was not a porn user I’d opt in to register my unhappiness at the censorship done in the name of a vocal minority of prudes with no evidence to support their lies and half-truths.

We also have the same sort of anti-porn types as in the US. The BBC has a bit more about the topic here http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17951067. The quotes are amazing – like trying to suggest ISPs are complicit in kids seeing porn even when they’re providing filter software but sure don’t suggest parents could do more or advise on approaches like having a pc in a family room and not leaving kids unsupervised in their rooms or even just talking to them and instead try and force opt-in porn blockers on us!

The way it’s being reported does not explain this at all, and is making the decision seem like a done deal. Your press is doing a stellar job of misreporting everything about this :(

Basically it’ll be discussed for a few months at some point in the future, they’ll fudge a compromise and we’ll get some silly vague conclusion that will need to be debated in parliament (if it even gets time allocated) and it would then have to be voted on by both tiers of Government if it gets that far before any sort of law came into place.

While the government is not bad at screwing stuff up, whichever party is in power, the agreement to consult is in no way a law change.