In previous blogs, the Data Protection and Digital Information Bill (No. 2) has been discussed (see here and here).
The bill has now had its first reading in the House of Lords and has been met with a less than positive reception. The lawmakers were concerned about the impact the proposed reforms to the Information Commissioner’s Office would have on whether the EU would accept that the new legislation would be seen as adequate. If the EU refuses to accept the new legislation as adequate, it may lead to many companies relocating the data protection element of their organisation to the EU.
Barbara Scott Young (formerly Baroness Young) stated in this regard:
“There seems to be some disconnect between what the EU Commission and the EU Parliament has begun to enunciate as a view that the new powers in the [technology minister] to meddle with the objective and impartial functioning of the Information Commissioner’s Office could result in the withdrawal of the UK adequacy decision. That seems to be a disconnect with the assurances that ministers have so far been getting’ in the Commons.”
Whilst the response from Jonathan Berry on behalf of the Government to this comment is that the proposed legislation ‘will create a modern ICO that can tackle the modern, more sophisticated challenges of today’, it appears the members of the House of Lords do not share the same view.
Another issue highlighted by child protection campaigner and lawmaker Beeban Kidron is that the new legislation removes some of the protections introduced by the Online Safety Act, which is a statute that allows coroners to access data held by online platforms in circumstances where a child’s death is thought to be related to internet platform use. Kidron said during the debate in the House:
“If the government fails to protect and future proof children’s privacy, then it will simply be giving with one hand in the [Online Safety Act] and taking away with the other in this bill.”
A further issue highlighted by the Information Commissioner, John Edwards, relates to the Government’s proposal to allow them access to certain financial information of individuals in the event fraud is suspected. Mr Edwards has stated that he does not yet have sufficient information to determine whether the proposed measure is proportionate to the aim that the Government is trying to achieve.
The debate as to whether the Data Protection and Digital Information Bill (No.2) will ever make it onto the Statute books continues. What is however clear is that the path to this bill passing is not going to be a smooth one.
How can we help?
Kevin Modiri is a Partner in our expert Dispute Resolution team, specialising in commercial disputes, insolvency, inheritance disputes, data breach claims and defamation claims.
If you have any questions concerning the subjects discussed in this article, please do not hesitate to contact Kevin or another member of the team in Derby, Leicester, or Nottingham on 0800 024 1976 or via our online enquiry form.
Contact us