Proceeding contribution from Baroness Royall of Blaisdon (Labour) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 29 November 2011. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Protection of Freedoms Bill.
Protection of Freedoms Bill
My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Baroness, Lady Hamwee, for tabling this amendment, and for the explanation from the noble Lord, Lord Dear. I think that it demonstrates that there is potential confusion in this part of the Bill. The noble Baroness asked about cold cases. I understand the difficulty described by the noble Lord, Lord Dear, in saying whether or not a case has been concluded. However, if in subsection (2) we are saying that, "““material may be retained until the conclusion””," we need to be a little more specific. The noble Lord talked about the practicalities but also the philosophical nature of these issues. Philosophy is a great thing but when it comes to legislation perhaps it needs to be a little more specific.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 733 c152
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Disability Data protection Databases Biometrics Crime prevention Crime Arrests Land Fingerprints DNA Evidence Immobilisation of vehicles Footwear Fines Motor vehicles Parking Personal records Privacy Rape Vulnerable adults
- Legislation
- Protection of Freedoms Bill 2010-12
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 19:45:00 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_789906
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_789906
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_789906