My Lords, we must be getting near the end of Report if the noble Baroness can refer to any part of it as a teddy bears’ picnic; that has been far from my experience with regard to our debates on these important issues in the Bill’s progress through your Lordships' House.
The Information Commissioner has raised no issues concerning this legislation. To the contrary, he has been very positive about it. That should considerably reassure all noble Lords. I wish to emphasise again what I said in Committee on this important point. Not everything that I say in Committee is always expressed with such graphic intensity that I deserve to be held to every line of it on every subsequent occasion, but the section that the noble Baroness quoted was a categoric statement of the Government’s position on the Bill.
As I said at Second Reading, overall the Information Commissioner has welcomed the fact that the Bill recognises the importance of ensuring that personal information is used only where necessary, and that confidentiality is respected. He very much welcomed the creation of a criminal offence for the illegal disclosure of personal information in Clause 36, which he believes should act as the significant deterrent.
Information held by the board will be used only for statistical purposes—I emphasise that again—as all the board’s functions are of course statistical. Furthermore, personal information held by the board will be protected against unlawful disclosure by a criminal sanction. Given the nature of the data-sharing provisions in the Bill and the powers that the Information Commissioner already has, it does not seem appropriate to include such an amendment. That is the basic reason why the amendment, although well intentioned, is unnecessary.
There are several further reasons for not accepting this amendment. First, we think it unlikely that the Information Commissioner would need to use the powers in this clause. Given that much statistical information is given voluntarily through surveys, the board has a strong interest in ensuring that the confidentiality of the information is held secure and that people trust the board to hold its information. The ONS has a good working relationship with the Information Commissioner and often asks his or his office’s advice on matters relating to the protection and handling of information, so previous practice is a guide to future conduct. Secondly, I should note that the Data Protection Act applies to the board as a body dealing with personal information. The board must therefore be registered as a data controller with the Information Commissioner and comply with the data principles in relation to all personal data with respect to which it is the data controller. Finally, the Information Commissioner already has statutory powers to undertake the activities set out in this amendment.
The noble Baroness raised an important point about the Bill. In doing so, she sought assurances that what was said in Committee is definitive, and I confirm that it is. I emphasise that the data-sharing clauses in the Bill are for statistical purposes only. It is not the Government’s intention that the board will be a conduit for information across government. That is the definitive government policy. I hope that the noble Baroness will accept that statement and withdraw the amendment.
Statistics and Registration Service Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Davies of Oldham
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 18 June 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Statistics and Registration Service Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
693 c63-4 
Session
2006-07
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 11:59:05 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_403535
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_403535
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_403535