Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from James Brokenshire (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Monday, 10 October 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill on Protection of Freedoms Bill (Programme) (No. 3).


Protection of Freedoms Bill (Programme) (No. 3)

One point of agreement between me and the right hon. Member for Kingston upon Hull West and Hessle (Alan Johnson) is that I think that this is a question of balancing collective protection and individual freedom. We can agree on that much, but in some ways the right hon. Gentleman is looking through the other end of the telescope. Through the indefinite retention regime that was the hallmark of the previous Labour Government, he seeks to retain data and information for as long as possible in case it becomes useful. I think he was accusing us of being dogmatic on this point in some ways, but he and his right hon. and hon. Friends come at it from the perspective that they want indefinite retention of everyone's DNA for as long as possible. Our starting point is different. Our concept is that of innocent until proven guilty, so we come at this from a different direction. I shall address some of the right hon. Gentleman's direct points, but, as this is a wide-ranging group of amendments, it might assist the House if I explain the Government's amendments before responding to those tabled by the right hon. Gentleman and others.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
533 c102-3 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Civil liberties Data protection Criminal proceedings Databases Counter-terrorism CCTV Biometrics Crime prevention Appeals Arrests Land DNA Immobilisation of vehicles Fixed penalties Motor vehicles Parking Personal records Parking offences Automatic number plate recognition
Legislation
Protection of Freedoms Bill 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk