My Lords, my Amendments 20 and 21 are to the Minister’s Amendment 19, which, as he explained, deals with notification to parents. My amendments would include the child in the notification.
Noble Lords will be aware of provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights and the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, both of which are relevant here. Without being technical about it, it seems to me a matter of common sense and principle that a child whose data these are should be part of this whole process. I doubt that I need spend long seeking to persuade your Lordships of that—well, I hope not; if I get a look from in front of me, perhaps I should.
The UN Committee on the Rights of the Child has made it clear that: "““The realization of the right of the child to express her or his views requires that the child be informed about the matters, options and possible decisions to be taken and their consequences by those who are responsible for hearing the child, and by the child’s parents or guardian””."
Amendment 23 follows an amendment that I had in Grand Committee relating to the provision of information. Noble Lords at that stage regarded what I was proposing as too burdensome, in that it was read as an annual requirement. I had not intended that the provision of information should be anything as burdensome as was understood, so I have brought back a simpler amendment, which would provide that the authority in question should ensure that information is provided to each parent and child on their rights, in language capable of being readily understood by them.
I am not proposing here regular pieces of paper in difficult language—I remember the noble Baroness, Lady Farrington, saying that in her experience, as both a mother and a grandmother, such pieces of paper tend to end up in the washing machine. I am simply saying that it needs to be recognised that information should be readily available, perhaps on the school’s website, along with other information. However, the provision of information in accessible language is an important principle. I understand that there has been some research that indicated that most children using biometric systems in schools had not considered how long their fingerprints would be held for. They were generally not concerned, which the researchers took as a serious matter. I am not entirely surprised that children may not think beyond what is immediately in front of them. However, it points up the need, not to shove it down children’s throats, but to make the information very easily accessible.
The Information Commissioner has made it clear that schools collecting data need to be aware that children are data subjects and that, "““it is they who should in the first instance be informed and consulted about the use of their personal data””."
Protection of Freedoms Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Hamwee
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 31 January 2012.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Protection of Freedoms Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
734 c1534-5 Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 15:13:43 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_805660
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_805660
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_805660