Asked by: David Davis (Conservative - Goole and Pocklington)
Question to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology:
To ask the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, what assessment he has made of the potential impact of the National Security Online Information Team's policies on the collection of personal data on people's ability to establish what information the Government holds about them.
Answered by Feryal Clark - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Science, Innovation and Technology)
DSIT’s National Security Online Information Team (NSOIT) does not actively collect personal data. However, it may receive or process some personal data in the course of its work and follows the requirements of UK GDPR and any advice or guidance from the Information Commissioner’s Office. NSOIT has published privacy notices on Gov.uk which set out how personal data may be processed. These notices include a section explaining the public’s data protection rights and how to establish if NSOIT does hold any individual data.
Asked by: David Davis (Conservative - Goole and Pocklington)
Question to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology:
To ask the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, if he will take steps to ensure that the National Security Online Information Team's social media monitoring work can be scrutinised by (a) Parliament and (b) the public.
Answered by Feryal Clark - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Science, Innovation and Technology)
DSIT ministers remain accountable to parliament and routinely answer questions from parliamentarians and select committees, including on the work of the National Security Online Information Team (NSOIT).
The department continues to respond to correspondence, Freedom of Information Act requests and Subject Access Requests from parliamentarians and members of the public. NSOIT has also published privacy notices which are accessible to the public on Gov.uk
Asked by: David Davis (Conservative - Goole and Pocklington)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what assessment she has made of the potential implications for her policies of police forces using facial recognition technology to identify individuals not sought in connection to ongoing criminal investigations.
Answered by Diana Johnson - Minister of State (Home Office)
Watchlists for live facial recognition deployments are compiled by the police and are specific to the operational requirements of each deployment
The College of Policing have published national guidance which sets out the categories of people that can be included on watchlists. They include people who are wanted either by the police or by the courts, missing persons, vulnerable people and people who could be a danger to themselves or others.
In each case there must be appropriate justification and authorisation, always passing the tests of necessity, proportionality and use for a policing purpose.
Asked by: David Davis (Conservative - Goole and Pocklington)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many people who are not wanted for arrest have been placed on police facial recognition watchlists.
Answered by Diana Johnson - Minister of State (Home Office)
Watchlists for live facial recognition deployments are compiled by the police and are specific to the operational requirements of each deployment
The College of Policing have published national guidance which sets out the categories of people that can be included on watchlists. They include people who are wanted either by the police or by the courts, missing persons, vulnerable people and people who could be a danger to themselves or others.
In each case there must be appropriate justification and authorisation, always passing the tests of necessity, proportionality and use for a policing purpose.
Asked by: David Davis (Conservative - Goole and Pocklington)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what data her Department holds on the number of times UK police forces have authorised targeted surveillance of journalists and lawyers.
Answered by Diana Johnson - Minister of State (Home Office)
Powers under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) and the Investigatory Powers Act 2016 (IPA) contain additional safeguards and protections, where the intention is for relevant public authorities to acquire sensitive material, such as information relating to confidential journalistic material, journalists' sources and matters subject to legal professional privilege. Further specific detail is set out in the statutory codes of practice pursuant to the powers under these Acts.
The Investigatory Powers Commissioner provides oversight of the use of investigatory powers and publishes annual reports which provide statistical information relating to the operation of powers.
Asked by: David Davis (Conservative - Goole and Pocklington)
Question to the Home Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, what guidance her Department has issued to police forces on the use of surveillance powers to carry out surveillance on journalists and lawyers.
Answered by Diana Johnson - Minister of State (Home Office)
Powers under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (RIPA) and the Investigatory Powers Act 2016 (IPA) contain additional safeguards and protections, where the intention is for relevant public authorities to acquire sensitive material, such as information relating to confidential journalistic material, journalists' sources and matters subject to legal professional privilege. Further specific detail is set out in the statutory codes of practice pursuant to the powers under these Acts.
The Investigatory Powers Commissioner provides oversight of the use of investigatory powers and publishes annual reports which provide statistical information relating to the operation of powers.
Asked by: David Davis (Conservative - Goole and Pocklington)
Question to the Department of Health and Social Care:
To ask the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, pursuant to the Answer of 30 July 2024 to Question 1398 on Down Syndrome Act 2022, what recent progress his Department has made on producing statutory guidance under the Down Syndrome Act 2022; and whether he plans to publish that guidance before the end of the year.
Answered by Stephen Kinnock - Minister of State (Department of Health and Social Care)
Officials are taking forward, as a priority, development of the Down Syndrome guidance, as required under the Down Syndrome Act 2022. Engagement with relevant stakeholders, including people with Down syndrome and organisations that work in support of people with Down syndrome, people with other genetic conditions, and a learning disability, or both, is taking place to inform the guidance. Most recently, a roundtable on improving life outcomes for people with Down syndrome was held on 26 November 2024.
We expect to publish the draft guidance for public consultation as soon as possible in the new year.
Asked by: David Davis (Conservative - Goole and Pocklington)
Question to the HM Treasury:
To ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer, whether her Department plans to publish risk assessments of proposed changes to (a) Agricultural Property Relief and (b) Business Property Relief.
Answered by James Murray - Exchequer Secretary (HM Treasury)
At Autumn Budget 2024, the Government took a number of difficult but necessary decisions on tax, welfare, and spending to restore economic stability, fix the public finances, and support public services.
The Government published information about the reforms to agricultural property relief and business property relief at www.gov.uk/government/publications/agricultural-property-relief-and-business-property-relief-reforms/summary-of-reforms-to-agricultural-property-relief-and-business-property-relief. Further explanatory information is also set out at www.gov.uk/government/news/what-are-the-changes-to-agricultural-property-relief.
In accordance with standard practice, a tax information and impact note will be published alongside the draft legislation before the relevant Finance Bill.
Asked by: David Davis (Conservative - Goole and Pocklington)
Question to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology:
To ask the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, with reference to the report entitled Securing meaningful transparency of public sector use of AI: Comparative approaches across five jurisdictions, published by the Public Law Project in October 2024, whether he has made an assessment of the potential merits of introducing a requirement on public bodies to notify individuals when a decision has been taken about them that was (a) made and (b) supported by (i) AI, (ii) an algorithmic and (iii) automated tool.
Answered by Feryal Clark - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Science, Innovation and Technology)
Central government departments and arm’s-length bodies (ALBs) have been working to draft Algorithmic Transparency Recording Standard (ATRS) records since this became mandatory earlier this year. Publication plans were disrupted by the general election, but multiple records are expected to be published soon.
Since the introduction of a mandatory requirement for use of ATRS in cross-government policy, we have seen a significant acceleration in progress towards adopting it, which will be reflected soon in published records. As such, we do not believe that legislation is necessary at this time. We will continue to explore further options for encouraging and enforcing the use of the ATRS, and the need to extend the breadth of the policy beyond central government.
In the UK’s data protection framework, Article 22 of the UK GDPR sets out the rules relating to solely automated decisions that have legal or similarly significant effects on individuals. Under these circumstances, individuals have the right to specific safeguards, including being notified of the decisions, being provided information about the solely automated decision making that has been carried out, and the right to contest those decisions and to obtain human intervention.
These specific safeguards for solely automated decision making complement the wider data protection framework’s existing data subject rights, including the rights to transparency, objection and access. Organisations must also continue to observe the data protection principles to ensure personal data is processed lawfully, fairly and transparently. These rules apply to all organisations, including public bodies.
Asked by: David Davis (Conservative - Goole and Pocklington)
Question to the Department for Science, Innovation & Technology:
To ask the Secretary of State for Science, Innovation and Technology, with reference to the report entitled Securing meaningful transparency of public sector use of AI: Comparative approaches across five jurisdictions, published by the Public Law Project in October 2024, whether he has made an assessment of the potential merits of putting public sector compliance with the Algorithmic Transparency Recording Standard on a statutory footing.
Answered by Feryal Clark - Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Department for Science, Innovation and Technology)
Central government departments and arm’s-length bodies (ALBs) have been working to draft Algorithmic Transparency Recording Standard (ATRS) records since this became mandatory earlier this year. Publication plans were disrupted by the general election, but multiple records are expected to be published soon.
Since the introduction of a mandatory requirement for use of ATRS in cross-government policy, we have seen a significant acceleration in progress towards adopting it, which will be reflected soon in published records. As such, we do not believe that legislation is necessary at this time. We will continue to explore further options for encouraging and enforcing the use of the ATRS, and the need to extend the breadth of the policy beyond central government.
In the UK’s data protection framework, Article 22 of the UK GDPR sets out the rules relating to solely automated decisions that have legal or similarly significant effects on individuals. Under these circumstances, individuals have the right to specific safeguards, including being notified of the decisions, being provided information about the solely automated decision making that has been carried out, and the right to contest those decisions and to obtain human intervention.
These specific safeguards for solely automated decision making complement the wider data protection framework’s existing data subject rights, including the rights to transparency, objection and access. Organisations must also continue to observe the data protection principles to ensure personal data is processed lawfully, fairly and transparently. These rules apply to all organisations, including public bodies.