My Lords, again I understand the purport of the noble Lord’s amendment. However, requiring a police officer to obtain a warrant from a circuit judge each time he wants to submit a request for data would be a huge burden on the police and the courts. It would have a significant impact on police operations by adding a delay into the system for making requests. That could potentially have serious consequences if the police receive intelligence that needs to be acted upon immediately. It would also increase police bureaucracy, as requests would have to be submitted twice: once to the circuit judge and, if a warrant were issued, once to the carrier. That would apply equally if the request were made to a magistrate rather than a circuit judge, although applying to a circuit judge would be even more cumbersome.
If the purpose of this amendment is to introduce a safeguard, I assure the noble Lord, Lord Dholakia, that a number of safeguards are already built into the process; I shall outline them. It will be lawful under Section 32(4) of the Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Act 2006 for a police constable at the rank of superintendent or above to request information only if it is necessary for police purposes. Any request must specify the period during which it has effect, up to a maximum period of six months. The police and all public authorities are under a duty pursuant to Section 6 of the Human Rights Act 1998 to ensure that they comply with convention rights. The use of personal data will also be compliant with the obligations under the Data Protection Act 1998. We do not consider that this amendment is necessary or practicable.
However, I thank the noble Lord for giving me an opportunity to outline the safeguards because I know that people have concerns about how this procedure will operate, how we will make sure that personal and private data are properly protected and whether the Data Protection Act applies. I understand that those concerns have been in circulation and therefore I am pleased to have an opportunity to state on the record that the safeguards are there and we do not think that the anxiety that people properly have is founded in fact. I hope that with that reassurance the noble Lord will feel able to withdraw his amendment.
Police and Justice Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Scotland of Asthal
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 9 October 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Police and Justice Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
685 c93-4 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 12:15:47 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_350404
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_350404
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_350404