---

Forensic Science

: The hon. Gentleman is right, but there are so many issues relating to the collection of DNA and the DNA database that I almost do not know where to begin. Disproportionality is another concern in relation to the databases. We heard some of the figures on the non-cautioned and non-charged side of the equation. Twenty-four per cent. of those on the database are black and from ethnic minorities, who comprise only 8 per cent. of the general population. I agree that the juvenile figure is terrible. There is a distinction, but not a huge one; if someone is innocent, they are innocent whatever age they are. I have not heard a logical argument from the Government as to why we should retain the DNA of anyone who is completely innocent. We hear the mantra, ““What is the problem if they are innocent?”” But our civil liberties rest on a presumption of innocence until one is proven guilty, not a presumption of, ““I'll keep it in case it is useful one day.”” Regarding the question of innocence, on 30 March, the Minister said:"““Forecasts indicate that it is likely to expand to 4.25 million profiles by 2007–08””." He added:"““It is not the case that anyone added to it is ‘innocent'.””" In the same speech, he stated that there will be"““some instances where entirely innocent young people are arrested and sampled in a case of mistaken identity””.—[Official Report, 30 March 2006; Vol. 444, cc. 1128–1130.]" There is confusion in the Minister's statement that serves only to exemplify and heighten the problems to which I have just alluded. I would like some clarification from him. Control and custodianship of the database must be raised. It is a positive step that the Government are to revise the custodial arrangements for the DNA database and to move away from control by the FSS to avoid a conflict of interest, but I would welcome detail of any discussions the Government have had with the Association of Police Authorities or the Association of Chief Police Officers regarding independent oversight of the database. Have such discussions taken place? I would also like to know the nature of the information that is to be stored on the database. The Government claim that such a database is needed to combat crime, but the information contained in it, though under independent custodianship, still needs to be public property and not a private commodity. I wanted to expand a little on some of the unintended consequences of disproportionality in the collection of data, particularly with regard to those who are innocent. Even if someone is found guilty of a crime and has their details put on the DNA database, what happens when they have served their sentence? Someone has to have been arrested for their DNA to be taken, and if they are then let go without caution or charge, so be it. It is possible that, at some point, the process could lead to refusals. If someone who had been arrested were, for example, to apply for a job in a bank or as a pilot, there might be stigma attached—especially as the details spread throughout the EU—simply because they were on a database, and the distinction between being innocent and guilty might not be made. There are inherent dangers and the future of an innocent person might well be blighted at some point because many people believe that there is no smoke without fire. The exacerbation of the problem of this database by stealth, particularly with regard to disproportionality, pertains to police discretionary powers. That is a debate for another day, but the result of the process in itself is disproportionality. That is exacerbated greatly by the DNA profiling that can now be carried out through the advance of science, which allows us to tell from DNA the ethnic mix of blood and, therefore, where a person might come from. There was a case in south London where 1,000 people of interest were asked to volunteer a DNA sample, all of whom were black because in this case the test would not hold water for the European white population. After such sweeps, the DNA is destroyed, but those who gave a sample were asked to sign a voluntary agreement that their DNA could be retained. Such processes contribute to the further disproportionality of our DNA databases. Along with the details of the innocent, the Minister is storing up problems for the future. I want him to answer those questions. It is not appropriate to continue along our current path without having a debate on the matter in the House of Commons in the proper way. There are too many dangers and risks involved. People's civil liberties are at stake.