Proceeding contribution from Lord Herbert of South Downs (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Monday, 24 November 2008. It occurred during Debate on Data Protection and Freedom of Information.
Data Protection and Freedom of Information
I do not think that the two situations relate. The chairman of the Electoral Commission will now be working for a different period—for more days in the week, I think, than the current chairman. It is not possible to make the easy read-across that the hon. Gentleman suggests. I was making the point that given the Information Commissioner's work load and his seniority, he is paid rather less than a number of other senior public officials. We know that 800 local government officials now earn more than £100,000 a year—an increase of 27 per cent. on the previous year. Some 132 council managers are paid more than the annual salary of a Cabinet Minister. It is also true that the Information Commissioner has been in the same salary bracket since 2005-06. I do not think that it is sensible to fix a senior public servant's salary in such a way and to have a particularly large rise to compensate for that fact, rather than making arrangements whereby his salary would increase sensibly in line with other salaries in the public sector year on year. Finally, it is clear that the Information Commissioner's responsibilities are growing. Today's announcement of additional powers for the Information Commissioner is largely welcome. There are concerns about the proposals for data sharing, which we will no doubt debate on a different day, but they underline the fact that the commissioner, who is responsible for a growing annual budget—it is now £16 million a year—and for 260 staff, will have to deal with those thorny issues. He will face continuing challenges. No doubt he will have more cases of Government data losses with which to contend over the course of the next few months, if the last few are anything to go by. He will have to deal with ensuring data protection in the private sector, too, and with the sensitive matter of data protection issues relating to Members of this House. We hope that he will maintain his firm resistance to the planned communications database. The Opposition's conclusion is that data issues are no longer peripheral; they are central to public concerns about personal privacy and to good government. Therefore, the Information Commissioner must be rewarded appropriately. We need to ensure that the post has an occupant of stature, quality and integrity. It is vital that that person has those qualities and can maintain the independence that the office demands.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 483 c577-8
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Disclosure of information Data protection Databases Accountability Freedom of information Private sector Pay Powers Public appointments Privacy Public sector Information Commissioner's Office
- Legislation
- Data Protection Act 1998
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 23:22:05 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_511735
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_511735
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_511735