One point of agreement between me and the right hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull West and Hessle (Alan Johnson) is that I think that this is a question of balancing collective protection and individual freedom. We can agree on that much, but in some ways the right hon. Gentleman is looking through the other end of the telescope. Through the indefinite retention regime that was the hallmark of the previous Labour Government, he seeks to retain data and information for as long as possible in case it becomes useful. I think he was accusing us of being dogmatic on this point in some ways, but he and his right hon. and hon. Friends come at it from the perspective that they want indefinite retention of everyone's DNA for as long as possible. Our starting point is different. Our concept is that of innocent until proven guilty, so we come at this from a different direction.
I shall address some of the right hon. Gentleman's direct points, but, as this is a wide-ranging group of amendments, it might assist the House if I explain the Government's amendments before responding to those tabled by the right hon. Gentleman and others.
Protection of Freedoms Bill (Programme) (No. 3)
Proceeding contribution from
James Brokenshire
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 10 October 2011.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Protection of Freedoms Bill (Programme) (No. 3).
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
533 c102-3 Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 13:12:48 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_770993
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_770993
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_770993