1-20 of 228 results for subject:Privacy
Librarians' tools
- Search time
- 0.484 seconds
- Solr query time
- 0.007 seconds
- Search query
- subject:Privacy
- We searched for
- subject_t:Privacy OR subject_ses:92583
Type
House
Session
More
Year
Department
Member
More
Primary member
More
Answering member
Legislative stage
Legislation
Subject
More
Publisher
My constituent’s mother was killed in 1981. At the time, it was covered up as a suicide pact, but 18 years later it was uncovered that she had actually been murdered by my constituent’s father and his mistress. I do not think that anyone in this House will be able to imagine the pain and suffering that she and her family have had to endure. They are now having to relive that pain, because ITV is dramatising their whole ordeal, completely against her wishes, using not only the real names of her family but her own real name. I have raised this with ITV and with Ofcom, and, as far as I can see, no rules have been broken, but does the Prime Minister agree that victims’ voices should
have a far greater role in any account of their tragedy? Will he meet me and my constituent to discuss what more could have been done in this case and how we can strengthen regulation in future to protect victims?
My constituent’s mother was killed in 1981. At the time, it was covered up as a suicide pact, but 18 years later it was uncovered that she had actually been murdered by my constituent’s father and his mistress. I do not think that anyone in this House will be able to imagine the pain and suffering that she and her family have had to endure. They are now having to relive that pain, because ITV is dramatising their whole ordeal, completely against her wishes, using not only the real names of her family but her own real name. I have raised this with ITV and with Ofcom, and, as far as I can see, no rules have been broken, but does the Prime Minister agree that victims’ voices should
have a far greater role in any account of their tragedy? Will he meet me and my constituent to discuss what more could have been done in this case and how we can strengthen regulation in future to protect victims?
I was not aware of the case that the hon. Lady rightly raises. I remember from my time working in the television industry that there are occasions when decisions are made that can cause a huge amount of hurt and upset to families. I will discuss this case with the Culture Secretary to bring it to his attention and see whether there is anything more—apart from the conversations that she has had with ITV and with Ofcom, which is a powerful regulator—that can be done.
I was not aware of the case that the hon. Lady rightly raises. I remember from my time working in the television industry that there are occasions when decisions are made that can cause a huge amount of hurt and upset to families. I will discuss this case with the Culture Secretary to bring it to his attention and see whether there is anything more—apart from the conversations that she has had with ITV and with Ofcom, which is a powerful regulator—that can be done.
I was not aware of the case that the hon. Lady rightly raises. I remember from my time working in the television industry that there are occasions when decisions are made that can cause a huge amount of hurt and upset to families. I will discuss this case with the Culture Secretary to bring it to his attention and see whether there is anything more—apart from the conversations that she has had with ITV and with Ofcom, which is a powerful regulator—that can be done.
My constituent’s mother was killed in 1981. At the time, it was covered up as a suicide pact, but 18 years later it was uncovered that she had actually been murdered by my constituent’s father and his mistress. I do not think that anyone in this House will be able to imagine the pain and suffering that she and her family have had to endure. They are now having to relive that pain, because ITV is dramatising their whole ordeal, completely against her wishes, using not only the real names of her family but her own real name. I have raised this with ITV and with Ofcom, and, as far as I can see, no rules have been broken, but does the Prime Minister agree that victims’ voices should
have a far greater role in any account of their tragedy? Will he meet me and my constituent to discuss what more could have been done in this case and how we can strengthen regulation in future to protect victims?
Clauses 109 to 137 agreed to, with clauses 109 to 111 and 119 to 137 agreed to on division (9 votes to 2). Clause 119 discussed with new clause 16 (Review of Bulk Powers). Clauses 128 and 134 agreed to as amended on division. Written evidence reported to the House.
Clauses 109 to 137 agreed to, with clauses 109 to 111 and 119 to 137 agreed to on division (9 votes to 2). Clause 119 discussed with new clause 16 (Review of Bulk Powers). Clauses 128 and 134 agreed to as amended on division. Written evidence reported to the House.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government how often the physical and governance arrangements which ensure that patients can have private conversations with pharmaceutical staff, in the retail sector, are examined by or on behalf of the General Pharmaceutical Council and what percentage of examinations are unacceptable.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government how often the physical and governance arrangements which ensure that patients can have private conversations with pharmaceutical staff, in the retail sector, are examined by or on behalf of the General Pharmaceutical Council and what percentage of examinations are unacceptable.
The Department does not hold this information. However, the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) has provided the following information.
The GPhC undertakes inspections of all registered pharmacies in Great Britain. The vast majority of pharmacies currently receive a routine inspection every three to four years. Inspectors will, in addition, visit pharmacies to investigate concerns from members of the public or health professionals.
Since November 2013 the GPhC has conducted 6,814 routine inspections of pharmacy premises to assess them against its standards. During every inspection GPhC inspectors seek evidence from the pharmacy team that standards relating to the privacy, dignity and confidentiality of patients and the public are met. These standards cover the storage of confidential and private information and the physical and governance arrangements for ensuring patients can have private conversations with pharmacy professionals.
Of the 6,814 inspections that have been carried out by the GPhC since November 2013, in 421 (6.2%) cases pharmacy premises were found to have failed one or more of the above three standards:
- 274 did not meet standard 1.7 (Information is managed to protect the privacy, dignity and confidentiality of patients and the public who receive pharmacy services);
- 174 did not meet standard 3.2 (Premises protect the privacy, dignity and confidentiality of patients and the public who receive pharmacy services); and
- 73 did not meet standard 5.3 (Equipment and facilities are used in a way that protects the privacy and dignity of the patients and the public who receive pharmacy services).
When pharmacy premises have not met one or more of the standards, they are required by the GPhC to complete and implement an improvement action plan.
In addition, the United Kingdom and Scottish Parliaments recently approved legislation which includes powers to issue an improvement notice or disqualify a pharmacy from the register for a failure to meet the standards. This will improve the GPhC’s ability to protect patients and improve the quality of the pharmacy services they receive.
In circumstances where the GPhC finds a registered professional’s fitness to practise is called into question it will investigate and can bring proceedings against that individual.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many pharmacies in the retail sector have been (1) reprimanded, and (2) sanctioned, by the General Pharmaceutical Council, in the last three years, for breaching patient privacy.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government how many pharmacies in the retail sector have been (1) reprimanded, and (2) sanctioned, by the General Pharmaceutical Council, in the last three years, for breaching patient privacy.
The Department does not hold this information. However, the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC) has provided the following information.
The GPhC undertakes inspections of all registered pharmacies in Great Britain. The vast majority of pharmacies currently receive a routine inspection every three to four years. Inspectors will, in addition, visit pharmacies to investigate concerns from members of the public or health professionals.
Since November 2013 the GPhC has conducted 6,814 routine inspections of pharmacy premises to assess them against its standards. During every inspection GPhC inspectors seek evidence from the pharmacy team that standards relating to the privacy, dignity and confidentiality of patients and the public are met. These standards cover the storage of confidential and private information and the physical and governance arrangements for ensuring patients can have private conversations with pharmacy professionals.
Of the 6,814 inspections that have been carried out by the GPhC since November 2013, in 421 (6.2%) cases pharmacy premises were found to have failed one or more of the above three standards:
- 274 did not meet standard 1.7 (Information is managed to protect the privacy, dignity and confidentiality of patients and the public who receive pharmacy services);
- 174 did not meet standard 3.2 (Premises protect the privacy, dignity and confidentiality of patients and the public who receive pharmacy services); and
- 73 did not meet standard 5.3 (Equipment and facilities are used in a way that protects the privacy and dignity of the patients and the public who receive pharmacy services).
When pharmacy premises have not met one or more of the standards, they are required by the GPhC to complete and implement an improvement action plan.
In addition, the United Kingdom and Scottish Parliaments recently approved legislation which includes powers to issue an improvement notice or disqualify a pharmacy from the register for a failure to meet the standards. This will improve the GPhC’s ability to protect patients and improve the quality of the pharmacy services they receive.
In circumstances where the GPhC finds a registered professional’s fitness to practise is called into question it will investigate and can bring proceedings against that individual.
Amendment to clause 61 negatived on division (2 votes to 9). Clause 61 agreed to on division (9 votes to 2). Schedule 4 agreed to as amended on division (9 votes to 2). Clauses 62 to 66 agreed to on division (9 votes to 2). Amendments to clause 67 negatived on division (2 votes to 9 and 6 votes to 9). Clause 67 agreed to on division (9 votes to 2). Clause 68, discussed with new clause 14 (Authorisations in relation to items subject to legal privilege) agreed to. Clause 69 agreed to on division (9 votes to 2).
Amendment to clause 61 negatived on division (2 votes to 9). Clause 61 agreed to on division (9 votes to 2). Schedule 4 agreed to as amended on division (9 votes to 2). Clauses 62 to 66 agreed to on division (9 votes to 2). Amendments to clause 67 negatived...
Clauses 70 to 74 agreed to. Schedule 5 agreed to. Clauses 75 to 77 agreed to, with clause 76 agreed to on division (9 votes to 2). Amendments to clause 78 negatived on division (7 votes to 8 and 2 votes to 9). Clause 78, discussed with new clause 7 (Persons who may apply for issue of warrant) and new clause 10 (Requirements that must be met by warrants) agreed to. Clauses 79 to 87 agreed to, with clause 86 agreed to on division (9 votes to 2). Amendments to clause 88 negatived on division (7 votes to 8). Clause 88 agreed to. Amendment to clause 89 negatived on division (7 votes to 8). Clauses 89 and 90 agreed to. Clause 91 under consideration when Committee adjourned. Written evidence reported to the House.
Clauses 70 to 74 agreed to. Schedule 5 agreed to. Clauses 75 to 77 agreed to, with clause 76 agreed to on division (9 votes to 2). Amendments to clause 78 negatived on division (7 votes to 8 and 2 votes to 9). Clause 78, discussed with new clause 7...
Programme order amended. Clause 1 agreed to. Clause 2, discussed with new clause 3 (Tort or delict of unlawful interception) agreed to. Clauses 3 to 6 agreed to. Schedule 1 agreed to. Clauses 7 and 8 agreed to. Clause 9, discussed with new clause 4 (Tort or delict of unlawfully obtaining communications data) agreed to. Clause 10 agreed to. Schedule 2 agreed to. Clauses 11 and 12 agreed to. Clause 13 under consideration when Committee adjourned.
Programme order amended. Clause 1 agreed to. Clause 2, discussed with new clause 3 (Tort or delict of unlawful interception) agreed to. Clauses 3 to 6 agreed to. Schedule 1 agreed to. Clauses 7 and 8 agreed to. Clause 9, discussed with new clause 4 (Tort or delict of unlawfully...
I echo the condolences the Home Secretary rightly paid to the family of the police officer in Northern Ireland who lost his life in the course of his duties. They are in our thoughts today.
Let me start with the principle on which I think there is broad agreement. From the...
I echo the condolences the Home Secretary rightly paid to the family of the police officer in Northern Ireland who lost his life in the course of his duties. They are in our thoughts today.
Let me start with the principle on which I think there is broad agreement. From the...
My rt hon Friend the Secretary of State for the Home Department (Theresa May) has today made the following Written Ministerial Statement:
I have today introduced the Investigatory Powers Bill. This important piece of legislation will provide a new framework to govern the use and oversight of investigatory powers by law...
My rt hon Friend the Secretary of State for the Home Department (Theresa May) has today made the following Written Ministerial Statement:
I have today introduced the Investigatory Powers Bill. This important piece of legislation will provide a new framework to govern the use and oversight of investigatory powers by law...
I have today introduced the Investigatory Powers Bill. This important piece of legislation will provide a new framework to govern the use and oversight of investigatory powers by law enforcement and the security and intelligence agencies. The enhanced privacy safeguards, which are at the heart of the Bill, protect not...
I have today introduced the Investigatory Powers Bill. This important piece of legislation will provide a new framework to govern the use and oversight of investigatory powers by law enforcement and the security and intelligence agencies. The enhanced privacy safeguards, which are at the heart of the Bill, protect not...
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what steps his Department is taking to ensure there are sufficient safeguards to respect individual privacy in place in respect of intelligence gathered by GCHQ.
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs, what steps his Department is taking to ensure there are sufficient safeguards to respect individual privacy in place in respect of intelligence gathered by GCHQ.
GCHQ’s intelligence gathering powers are authorised under legislation, including the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, the Data Retention and Investigatory Powers Act 2014, and the Intelligence Services Act 1994. Its work, including its respect for privacy, is scrutinised by the Intelligence and Security Committee, the Interception of Communications Commissioner and the Intelligence Services Commissioner.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will make representations to the government of Slovenia about the case of Bostjan Bozic and the issues it raises under the European Convention on Human Rights.
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether they will make representations to the government of Slovenia about the case of Bostjan Bozic and the issues it raises under the European Convention on Human Rights.
Motion that Members of the House shall be under no undue restraint from being able to attend the House, and that this principle has been, and continues to be, encompassed in the privileges of the House claimed at the beginning of each Parliament; That this House accordingly: (1) endorses the Second Report of the Procedure Committee, Session 2015-16, Notification of the arrest of Members, HC 649; (2) directs the Clerk of the House and the Speaker to follow the protocol on notification of arrest of Members set out in Annex 2 to that Report; and (3) directs each chief officer of police in the United Kingdom, immediately upon the arrest of any Member by the police force under that officer’s command, to notify the Clerk of the House in accordance with the provisions of that protocol. Agreed to on question.
Motion that Members of the House shall be under no undue restraint from being able to attend the House, and that this principle has been, and continues to be, encompassed in the privileges of the House claimed at the beginning of each Parliament; That this House accordingly: (1) endorses the...
I beg to move,
That Members of the House shall be under no undue restraint from being able to attend the House, and that this principle has been, and continues to be, encompassed in the privileges of the House claimed at the beginning of each Parliament;
That this House accordingly:
(1) endorses the...
I beg to move,
That Members of the House shall be under no undue restraint from being able to attend the House, and that this principle has been, and continues to be, encompassed in the privileges of the House claimed at the beginning of each Parliament;
That this House accordingly:
(1) endorses the...
In the previous Parliament, the Procedure Committee was asked to look into the existing protocols around the arrest of Members of Parliament. We started preliminary inquiries in early 2015, and this work laid the foundation for the inquiry we launched shortly after the general election.
The findings of the inquiry were...
In the previous Parliament, the Procedure Committee was asked to look into the existing protocols around the arrest of Members of Parliament. We started preliminary inquiries in early 2015, and this work laid the foundation for the inquiry we launched shortly after the general election.
The findings of the inquiry were...