---

Data Protection (Processing of Sensitive Personal Data) Order 2006

I am grateful for the comments of both noble Lords. I am delighted that I had answered the three questions of the noble Lord, Lord Kingsland. Indeed, everything that the noble Lord said about the answers to the questions was absolutely correct. I am grateful to him for his support and for recognising that the order is justified. The current position is that the police send information to the credit card companies when someone is cautioned, convicted or reprimanded. The issue has been that under the Data Protection Act they could not use that information without the permission of the individual. We have simply removed that prohibition for this very particular set of circumstances. This is about the prevention of re-offending. I hope that if we and the credit card companies publicise this measure it may act as a deterrent, which would be a good thing. When someone is cautioned, it is an acceptance of guilt. It will be up to the credit card companies if they wish to differentiate. The question for them will be whether they consider that the breach of contract which has taken place is sufficient for them to close the account and/or to remove the card. Whether or not they choose to do so is entirely a matter for them; it is not for us to say. It is for them to weigh up the situation, and we do not wish to be involved in the relationship between them and their customers and how they choose to act. It states on my note that we consider these to be serious crimes. I cannot put it any better. We need to do everything we can to disrupt and curtail the activities of those involved in downloading abusive images of children. As I have already indicated, these are children who have been abused in order for the image to exist at all. It is not disproportionate to say that in these particular circumstances, where the credit card companies have said that they would prefer to be able to consider whether someone should hold a credit card if it has been used for that purpose, we should give them access to the information. While I understand that the noble Lord may feel that there are varying degrees of offence, if someone is cautioned there is no question that they have committed the offence. It is then for the credit card companies to determine what action they wish to take. We think that this is a very small but important step. The industry came to us to discuss the matter and we have been pleased to respond. We are working closely with the industry and, where we can act, we should act. In this case, we think we should. I commend the order to the Committee. On Question, Motion agreed to.