All 2 Debates between Baroness O'Neill of Bengarve and Lord Puttnam

Mon 20th Nov 2017
Data Protection Bill [HL]
Lords Chamber

Committee: 5th sitting (Hansard): House of Lords
Thu 7th Jul 2011

Data Protection Bill [HL]

Debate between Baroness O'Neill of Bengarve and Lord Puttnam
Lord Puttnam Portrait Lord Puttnam (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I support this amendment and identify myself totally with the remarks of the noble Lord, Lord Clement-Jones. I am trying to be practical, and I am possibly even pushing at an open door here. I have a facsimile of the 1931 Highway Code. The introduction by the then Minister says:

“By Section 45 of the Road Traffic Act, 1930, the Minister of Transport is directed to prepare a code of directions for the guidance of road users … During the passage of the Act through Parliament, the opinion was expressed almost universally … that much more could be done to ensure safety by the instruction and education of all road users as to their duties and obligations to one another and to the community as a whole”.


Those last few words are very important. This must be, in a sense, a citizens’ charter for users—a constantly updated notion—of the digital environment to be sure of their rights and of their rights of appeal against misuse. This is exactly where the Government have a duty of care to protect people from things they do not know about as we move into a very difficult, almost unknown digital environment. That was the thinking behind the 1931 Highway Code, and we could do a lot worse than do something similar. That is probably enough for now, but I will undoubtedly return to this on Report.

Baroness O'Neill of Bengarve Portrait Baroness O’Neill of Bengarve
- Hansard - -

My Lords, I support the spirit of this amendment. I think it is the right thing and that we ultimately might aspire to a code. In the meantime, I suspect that there is a lot of work to be done because the field is changing extremely fast. The stewardship body which the noble Lord referred to, a deliberative body, may be the right prelude to identifying the shape that a code should now take, so perhaps this has to be taken in a number of steps and not in one bound.

BSkyB

Debate between Baroness O'Neill of Bengarve and Lord Puttnam
Thursday 7th July 2011

(13 years, 5 months ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text
Lord Puttnam Portrait Lord Puttnam
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords—

Lord Puttnam Portrait Lord Puttnam
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, is the Minister having a conversation with her noble friend the Justice Minister, who is sitting at her side, and with the noble Lord, Lord Crickhowell, who is sitting behind her, to confirm that if she or her colleagues in another place check the record, they will discover that during the passage of the 2003 Act this exact clause was discussed in detail? The type of eventuality that we are dealing with today was anticipated and this clause was intended to deal with it. To ignore that is an abrogation of the will of Parliament.

Baroness Rawlings Portrait Baroness Rawlings
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The noble Lord, Lord Puttnam, makes a valid point. The Enterprise Act 2002 sets out the due process, which is that the Culture Secretary has to make a quasi-judicial decision on the impact of the proposed merger on media plurality issues alone. That was said by the right honourable Member in the other place, Mr Vince Cable, and that is what is happening. The decision will be made after Ofcom and the OFT have made their decisions.