My Lords, I too am very grateful for the offer of a further meeting. I am slightly puzzled because I thought I had gone a considerable way to meet the very specific objections the Minister made to my previous drafts of these amendments in his letter and which also members of the Bill team have made. They are very narrow amendments and have a considerable protective implication because I have not suggested that it is incomplete databases but incomplete parts of databases that should not be released. If one thinks through the difference between the two one sees that whereas it might be open to a public authority to go on saying, ““Oh our database is incomplete, we are perfecting it, we are polishing it, we are taking it into the next time period,”” it could not say the same of each part of a database. So I believe that that move achieves the purposes of open data while not undermining them by licensing the disclosure of data that then have to be pulled back with the comment, ““Well, it was only 10 per cent of the data points you got because that is what we had when your request was granted,””. It is a substantial amendment. Nevertheless I beg leave to withdraw Amendment 147A.
Amendment 147A withdrawn.
Amendments 147B to 150 not moved.
Amendment 151
Moved by
Protection of Freedoms Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness O'Neill of Bengarve
(Crossbench)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 12 January 2012.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Protection of Freedoms Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
734 c13GC Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 20:46:02 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_799844
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_799844
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_799844