Serious Crime Bill [HL]

The difficulty is that, although the Minister says that we do not need this because the power is there, she then says, ““We do not want to use the power because it will cause a 28-day delay and therefore, perhaps, undermine what we are trying to achieve; and it would distract the Information Commissioner from doing other work that might be more appropriate””. The issue is that these powers are there and are appropriate in this context. It focused my mind on what Part 3 of the Bill is all about, against a background—as my noble friend Lord Northesk said—of our being 10 years on from 1998. I appreciate that this is an odd amendment; it is not in the general run of what we have been debating. It exists against the background of our feeling that the Government have repeatedly introduced measures without proper forethought—or, at least, without sharing it with the Committee. Because of advice that we have been given from those I take seriously, who have been involved in advising organisations on data sharing, processing and assessable processing within the terms of the Data Protection Act, on this rare occasion—I do not intend to pursue the matter on Report—I shall seek the opinion of the Committee. On Question, Whether the said amendment(No. 110A) shall be agreed to? Their Lordships divided: Contents, 44; Not-Contents, 74.