For sake of clarity, here’s what the bill actually proposed...

10     Obligations to limit internet access: assessment and preparation
After section 124F of the Communications Act 2003 insert—

“124G   Obligations to limit internet access: assessment and preparation

(1)  The Secretary of State may direct OFCOM to—
(a)  assess whether one or more technical obligations should be imposed on internet service providers;
(b)  take steps to prepare for the obligations;
(c)  provide a report on the assessment or steps to the Secretary of State.

(2)  A “technical obligation”, in relation to an internet service provider, is an obligation for the provider to take a technical measure against particular subscribers to its service.

(3)  A “technical measure” is a measure that—
(a)  limits the speed or other capacity of the service provided to a subscriber;
(b) prevents a subscriber from using the service to gain access to particular material, or limits such use;
(c) suspends the service provided to a subscriber; or
(d) limits the service provided to a subscriber in another way.

(4) The assessment and steps that the Secretary of State may direct OFCOM to carry out or take under subsection (1) include, in particular—
(a) consultation of copyright owners, internet service providers, subscribers or any other person;
(b) an assessment of the likely efficacy of a technical measure in relation to a particular type of internet access service; and
(c) steps to prepare a proposed technical obligations code.

(5) Internet service providers must give OFCOM any assistance that OFCOM reasonably require for the purposes of complying with any direction under this section.
(6) The Secretary of State must lay before Parliament any direction under
this section.”

11 Obligations to limit internet access
After section 124G of the Communications Act 2003 insert—
“124HObligations to limit internet access

(1) The Secretary of State may at any time by order impose a technical obligation on internet service providers if the Secretary of State considers it appropriate in view of—
(a) an assessment carried out or steps taken by OFCOM under section 124G; or
(b) any other consideration.
(2) An order under this section must specify the date from which the technical obligation is to have effect, or provide for it to be specified.
(3) The order may also specify—
(a) the criteria for taking the technical measure concerned against a subscriber;
(b) the steps to be taken as part of the measure and when they are to be taken.”

And here’s what the Digital Britain report suggested as “technical measures”...

Blocking (Site, IP, URL), Protocol blocking, Port blocking, Bandwidth capping (capping the speed of a subscriber’s Internet connection and/or capping the volume of data traffic); Bandwidth shaping (limiting the speed of a subscriber’s access to selected protocols/services and/or capping the volume of data to selected protocols/services); Content identification and filtering– or a combination of these measures.

Any of these measures would be used only if a notification and education system, plus legal business models, fail to reduce digital copyright infringement by 70 percent amongst those who would be notified.

Since “suspend” usually means a temporary stop, most people have interpreted the bill would only temporarily revoke subscribers’ ISP account - and only in the most chronic of cases. The language omits any specific suspension timeframe, however, and - depending on your persuasion - may indeed give free reign to perpetual suspension.

But Number10.gov.uk’s statement appears to put paid to that, making explicit reference to “temporary account suspension”.