Proceeding contribution from Lord Pearson of Rannoch (UK Independence Party) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 24 March 2009. It occurred during Debates on delegated legislation on Data Retention (EC Directive) Regulations 2009.
Data Retention (EC Directive) Regulations 2009
My Lords, I also support the amendment. I underline a question asked by the noble Baroness, Lady Neville-Jones, although I am not sure that she made it as strongly as it should be made in her otherwise lengthy and brilliant exposition of the problem in front of us. The Minister must admit that, in his introduction of this statutory instrument, he was trying to persuade us that it is needed for security reasons. When he comes to reply, I would be grateful if he said that that was not so, but I certainly understood him to say that. Therefore, how can it be reasonable that the regulations allow, ""hundreds of different public bodies access to information on personal emails and internet activity"?" He has to answer that because the two positions are clearly incompatible.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 709 c632
- Session
- 2008-09
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Data protection Databases Crime prevention Cooperation Direct marketing Electronic surveillance Evidence Intelligence services ICT EU law Information Industry Internet Email Local government Powers Privacy Public bodies Mobile phones Monitoring Standards Telecommunications Security Telephones
- Legislation
- Data Retention (EC Directive) Regulations 2009
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 10:38:18 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_542110
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_542110
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_542110