Protection of Freedoms Bill
Public Bill Committee, 24 March 2011.
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Good morning everybody. We will now hear oral evidence from the Information Commissioner’s Office. Mr Smith and Mr Graham, could you kindly introduce yourselves for the record?
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
You are most welcome, and we are grateful to you for coming. We have a lot to get through in one hour, so I encourage colleagues to be succinct with their questions, and if you could be relatively succinct with your answers we will make a lot of progress.
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
Good morning gentlemen, and thank you for coming in. Given that a CCTV code of practice or set of guidelines has already been issued to aid compliance with the Data Protection Act 1998, what are your views on the need for a further code of practice in the form proposed in the Bill?
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
Is there a risk that the new role of surveillance camera commissioner might overlap with your role or would you give a similar answer to that you have just given, which is that there are some differences?
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
Good morning. Mr Graham, can you expand on the point that you wished you had had more liaison and discussion with the Home Office before the provisions in the Bill were introduced? Some of us are very concerned about the overlap between the Information Commissioner and the new surveillance camera commissioner. Indeed, would it not be better for there to be an extension to your functions to include that point so that the problem of duplication can be avoided?
James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)
Good morning. Can you comment on your existing relationship with the interim CCTV regulator in that role? Presumably, you have ongoing discussions.
John Robertson (Labour, Glasgow North West)
I was shuffling papers when Scotland was mentioned and I am wondering exactly where you come in with regard to Scotland and data etc. Also, if you think that there is something missing from the Bill, what is it?
John Robertson (Labour, Glasgow North West)
What would you change in the Bill?
Steven Baker (Conservative, Wycombe)
Could you tell us the headlines? What are the prime objectives of CCTV regulation, in your view?
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
Mr Graham, we heard some highly entertaining evidence on Tuesday from the interception commissioner about the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. His view was that there was not a problem with the Act, or at least if there was, it was that not enough local authorities were using the powers. Do you echo that view?
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
Just to be clear, in terms of the proposals in the Bill on RIPA, you do not have a view.
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
Moving to private entities and their use of surveillance, you have expressed concerns about that. Should the Bill try to address those issues, and is it doing so?
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
Enforcement is the issue, not legislation.
Rehman Chishti (Conservative, Gillingham and Rainham)
I have a question for Mr Smith. You said earlier that there can be wide concern about the use of RIPA powers. Given that concern, is the proposal for judicial safeguards as a way of checks and balances the right way forward?
Rehman Chishti (Conservative, Gillingham and Rainham)
That leads to the argument about the perception of the wider public, and there is wide concern. There is the concept of justice not just being done, but seeing to be done. If you have gone through that checks and balances route, you will then give the fair and proportionate way forward. Are we right in saying that?
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
Can you say something about the changing definitions of “publicly owned company”? What problems have there been with the current definition? How will the change to the definition included in the Bill help? What sort of things will be brought into your remit? Some examples would be helpful.
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
Yes.
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
It might not be relevant to our evidence this morning, but the point is well made.
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
For my part, the change is welcome, in terms of what is included in the Bill, for the reasons you state.
I have a couple of other questions. Obviously, some changes in respect of the appointment and tenure of the Information Commissioner are included in the Bill. We can always argue, but why do you think that the Bill needs to include something that says the Information Commissioner will be appointed on merit?
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
But were you not appointed on merit when you got the job?
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
I am not trying to be rude; I apologise. I am just making the obvious point that I do not understand why the Bill needs to include that the person appointed to the job will be the best person for the job.
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
That is interesting. I will ask another question now, but I was going to ask a question about the term of office, because I agree with that comment. I think that seven years offers the flexibility that is needed.
You can charge for certain things at the moment, but as I understand it you have to get the agreement of the Secretary of State to do so. The Bill removes that requirement, and it allows you to charge for certain services and to employ the number of staff that you want. Again, that is trying to strengthen the role and the independence of the commissioner. Can you give us some indication of the sort of things that you might charge for that you currently do not charge for? Also, what sort of control will there be on that process? Will there be a market force control? Given that people have to comply with the law, what check will there be on the charges that you make or who you make them to?
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
You will not be in profit?
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
Should there have been anything in the Bill about removing the ministerial veto?
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
It is in my Bill, but it is not in this Bill.
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
What is your view, Mr Graham?
Gareth Johnson (Conservative, Dartford)
Generally, do you feel that the Bill tackles some of your concerns about DNA retention? I am thinking particularly of whether you feel it is proportionate—certainly more proportionate than the current regime.
Gareth Johnson (Conservative, Dartford)
Would you accept that this is a far more evidence-based system than the current system?
Gareth Johnson (Conservative, Dartford)
I know there are issues about devolved legislation and so on, but what we suggest in the Bill is based on the Scottish model. In your experience, how effective is the regime in Scotland?
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
My first question is not the one that I was going to ask, but you have just said that there is evidence to support three years and the Scottish arrangements. I do not expect you to go through that evidence now because we do not have time, but could you send it to me? I cannot find it.
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
Six.
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
We are dealing with the Crime and Security Act 2010 that will introduce six years, although it has not yet come into force, and the Bill before us. Do you say that the evidence supports the Bill or the 2010 Act?
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
Can you send us that evidence?
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
Mr Graham, may I clarify a point with you? You said that the police national computer records should be amended if DNA profiles are removed from the DNA database. Is that in relation only to people who are unlawfully arrested or mistakenly arrested as in clause 1, or does it involve anybody who has been arrested in relation to a crime but not charged or convicted?
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
So there should be no record of somebody ever being arrested if they are not charged?
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
That is what I want to clarify. My understanding of the current practice—setting aside DNA—is that an arrest would be recorded by the police, so if the same person were arrested on a future occasion, that would be on the database. If no action was taken against them on that previous arrest, are you suggesting that that information should not be there?
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
But the DNA will be deleted, will it not? Unless it is a serious, violent or sexual crime, it will be deleted.
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
I have one very brief question. What is your understanding of the process that police follow if they want to extend the length of time that they retain someone’s DNA? I am talking about someone who is not charged but arrested for a violent or sexual crime, whose DNA is retained and, at the end of the three years, the police want to keep it. This is an innocent person whose DNA the police want to keep for an extra two years. What is your understanding of the process that they have to go through then, and do you have any concerns about it?
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
An open court.
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
An innocent person is named in an open court.
James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)
I want to develop one of the themes that you were both addressing in relation to the deletion of records. Will you comment on the discussions with the Association of Chief Police Officers, to which we were referred during Tuesday’s evidence session? Are you currently engaged in those discussions as part of a practical way of addressing some of the issues that have been highlighted?
James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)
Yes.
James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)
Taking you back to the previous comments that were made in relation to the Crime and Security Act, I remember that, at the time, the Information Commissioner’s Office expressed concern that those provisions on six-year retention—as it was then—were not proportionate and did not go far enough. Presumably, from what you have said this morning, that is still your view. Will you expand on why the approach in the current Bill is more appropriate and proportionate than what existed in the previous one?
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
Coming back briefly to the issue of DNA deletion, I wanted to be certain on what you require to have happened from a data protection point of view. Under data protection, if someone asks for something to be deleted, you want it to be deleted in its entirety. Or do you? The process starts with a sample, which may involve more than one person’s DNA. If, for instance, you do some sort of analysis and arrive at one sample at the end, which is computerised and easy to delete, and you can delete the reference on the police national computer at the same time, how far back upstream do you want the deletion to go, in terms of getting rid of anything that is held?
John Robertson (Labour, Glasgow North West)
You keep mentioning the Scottish way of doing things, but Scottish law is not the same as that in England and Wales. Have you taken into consideration that we have a third verdict available in our cases? One of the reasons I have been given that the extensions have not been asked for in Scotland is simply that the process that has been put in place for the extension is too cumbersome and lengthy and, in effect, you are tipping off the person that you are trying to investigate.
John Robertson (Labour, Glasgow North West)
But it is not evidence-based in relation to the verdicts that are given. You keep talking about the need for evidence, but that is an English way of looking at things. There is a certain amount of perception in Scottish law.
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
Moving away from evidence, I have a couple of practical points to make. There will be a new commissioner, although the commissioner for the retention of the material will, as I understand it, work on the grounds of national security. I suppose not, but do you expect there to be any relationship between that commissioner and yourself? Secondly, a DNA strategy board will be set up to oversee what is going on. Do you see a role for yourselves, in terms of the relationship you have with that new board?
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
The new board?
Diana Johnson (Labour, Kingston upon Hull North)
Could I ask you about the safeguards in the Bill, relating to the need for both parents to give written consent to the use of biometric data? I am particularly interested in the child’s ability to override parental consent. I wonder about the practicalities, especially when you are dealing with very young children—a five-year-old, for example. Obviously, the definition of child in the Bill goes up to the age of 18, so there is a wide age range. How would that work?
Steven Baker (Conservative, Wycombe)
Do you think that the area of fingerprinting children is one where we have allowed ourselves to be too dazzled by the possibilities of technology? It seems to me that we risk depersonalising children from a very young age by subjecting them to technology. Do you agree, and do you think that that has profound risks?
Steven Baker (Conservative, Wycombe)
Do you agree that there is now an automatic tendency for technology to advance and for collecting more and more data about people?
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
Can I return to the child having the right to override the parent? The Bill as it is currently drafted, unless I have read it wrongly, allows a five-year-old child to object. The Bill specifies up to 18. I just want clarity from the Information Commissioner’s office. Although we might say it could happen at 16 and 17, and perhaps at 15 or 14, presumably you would not expect an infant to be able to override a parent, would you?
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
I am sure that that will be hotly debated later in our Committee stage. Our final questions relate to criminal records.
Rehman Chishti (Conservative, Gillingham and Rainham)
On criminal records, having read your written submission, would I be right in saying that you broadly support the principle whereby the individual is given access to their criminal records and information against them before they are provided to the employer?
Lynne Featherstone (Liberal Democrat, Hornsey and Wood Green)
I welcome the opportunity to get your views about the overall arrangements for the vetting and barring scheme, and the criminal records regime. Are they more proportionate? Is it your view that the totality of the vetting and barring scheme, and the Criminal Records Bureau regime, will improve matters?
Diana Johnson (Labour, Kingston upon Hull North)
Can I follow up that point about Mrs Mason’s recommendations? Would one of those that you would like to see implemented be the sector-specific criminal records check? Is that one of the recommendations?
Diana Johnson (Labour, Kingston upon Hull North)
When she gave evidence earlier this week, she talked about the criminal records check for employment in the children’s sector being specific to that sector, and thus involving any information that was held to do with working in the children’s sector. If you worked in the vulnerable adults sector, the information would be specific to that sector, rather than it being just a general criminal records check.
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Thank you. We have one minute left.
John Robertson (Labour, Glasgow North West)
When Mrs Mason gave evidence, she was not sure about the answer to this point. I asked her about group applications for CRB checks, which happen quite a lot when certain areas are brought into the system, such as airports. In the case of airports, there was a big rush and there were lots of complaints in the press about it. The airport authorities were paying for these checks. Where does it lie with what you were saying about the individual not needing to disclose what they have got when it is a company that is meeting the agreements in law? Why should the company not get it? It is paying for it.
John Robertson (Labour, Glasgow North West)
I appreciate that, but if there was a blanket rule, these companies would fall foul of it.
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Thank you very much indeed, Mr Graham and Mr Smith, and I am sorry we have run out of time. Thank you for your excellent and very clear evidence.
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Mr Frankel, a warm welcome to you, and thank you very much for being with us. May I remind everyone that we have to conclude at 10.25 am, so I ask for concise questions and answers?
Steven Baker (Conservative, Wycombe)
Mr Frankel, do you think that the package of changes in the Bill increases the accountability of the public sector?
Steven Baker (Conservative, Wycombe)
Are there any areas where you feel that the Bill could be improved or expanded to support freedom of information?
Steven Baker (Conservative, Wycombe)
As a software engineer, I am very familiar with open-source software licensing. Do you think that some kind of open-source licence should be mandated for these data sets—something like Creative Commons?
Steven Baker (Conservative, Wycombe)
Would you agree that this is vital to making transparency and accountability work?
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
Official statistics are not included with the raw data, are they? Can you say a little more about the form in which you think data should be released? In terms of freedom of information, is the real issue not releasing data in such a way that people can use them, and then be able to cross-match? The easiest way to do that is if it is electronic, but there is no requirement for that.
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
Should they be able to require it to be electronic?
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
Is the implication of that, Mr Frankel, that the original documentation could be one thing, but some things could be missed out when you get the electronic version?
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
Would your suggestion be that the Bill could be improved by requiring somebody to ask for the original documentation on which the raw data that they were going to be given appeared?
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
Mr Frankel, do you have any examples of the way in which the original definition of a publicly owned company was, in your view, getting in the way of getting information out into the public domain?
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
Do you consider that organisations such as Network Rail, which for all intents and purposes is a public company funded by the public purse, should also be subject to FOI?
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
What about the royal family?
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
This is a general question. What do you think about the Bill’s changes to the appointment and tenure of the Information Commissioner? Do you think it will strengthen the independence of the role? Do you think it is a good step forward?
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
So that I am not misrepresenting you, at the moment the Bill says it is a five-year term, and your view is that there should be the possibility of a further one or two years.
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
The Bill takes away quite a number of the powers of the Secretary of State with respect to the Information Commissioner. What powers do you think the Secretary of State should retain? For example, we can make somebody completely independent and almost say, “There you are”. What powers, if any, should the Secretary of State have vis-à-vis the Information Commissioner?
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
What about the charging regime? I do not know whether you were here when we talked about the ability of the commissioner now to charge for more of the functions and services that they supply. To be fair to Mr Graham, we have already said that we are not talking about commercialisation. This might not be true with him, but supposing we go down the road, and in three or five years somebody can start to make money and says, “If I make money on that, I can invest in a better computer”.
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
What about the idea that we are starting to see a multiplicity of commissioners? In the Bill, there is a commissioner for biometric material—we will clarify this, because it is perhaps just for national security—a surveillance camera commissioner and so on. What do you think the information will be with respect to the Information Commissioner and those others?
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
Would you have one big supremo?
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
Would it improve the operation of things?
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
Are you disappointed that the Bill does not get rid of the ministerial veto, or do you think that there are circumstances in which Ministers should be able to exercise a veto?
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
We have a couple of minutes left. Are there any other questions for Mr Frankel?
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
Is there anything you would like included in the Bill that is not in the Bill?
Gary Streeter (Conservative, South West Devon)
Thank you very much, Mr Frankel, for your evidence and the clarity of your words.
Martin Caton (Labour, Gower)
We will now hear oral evidence from the NSPCC, the Scout Association and Stonewall. Welcome to our deliberations. I remind all hon. Members that questions should be limited to matters within the scope of the Bill and that we must stick strictly to the timings in the programme motion that the Committee agreed. I hope that I do not have to interrupt anyone in mid-sentence, but I will do so if need be.
Jim Shannon (DUP, Strangford)
It is good that the issue of vetting for work with 16 and 17-year-olds is coming back in. I would like to ask you a couple of questions quickly. I am conscious of what Mr Caton said; he moves us along and we do not hang about. In your opinion, is it not time for the Independent Safeguarding Authority to publish detailed management information on referrals and barring decisions in England, Wales and Northern Ireland? That would help to inform decision making and the development of the legislation and the vetting arrangements generally. That is a specific issue for me back home, but it applies to England and Wales as well.
Jim Shannon (DUP, Strangford)
It is good to hear the accent from back home. Some people here cannot understand me, but at least I know one person can. Would the NSPCC agree that, in line with the Government’s desire to facilitate the portability of Criminal Records Bureau certificates, and to ensure that loopholes do not appear, barring information needs to be provided on CRB disclosures for both work in regulated activity and work where a CRB certificate can be obtained, and do the amendments to the criteria that you have seen for barring cause you any concerns?
Jim Shannon (DUP, Strangford)
Do you have any concerns about the proposed changes of the definitions of vulnerable adults and regulated activity in relation to vulnerable adults?
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
Do you think that the distinction between “supervised” and “unsupervised” activities is sufficient within the Bill?
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
I do.
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
So would it be fair to say that, as the Bill is currently drafted, you do not think that there are sufficient safeguards? What concerns me—it is what lies behind my question—is that the Bill does not take account of the fact that people who are seeking to get close to young children to do them harm are prepared to bide their time and operate over time.
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
Are you satisfied with the provisions relating to informing employers and potential employers of a person’s status? The Bill contains provisions about that process, as I am sure you know. I would be interested to hear your views, particularly on the issue of the consent of an individual being required before an employer can be informed if the individual has been barred.
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
If I can just clarify, I acknowledge what you say about volunteers and employment, but the principle in relation to proportionality and human rights is not something that you have any objections to. You are quite happy that it is appropriate, under the circumstances, that the consent of an individual is required before a third party is informed about potential barring, so that errors can be corrected.
Diana Johnson (Labour, Kingston upon Hull North)
I was interested in what you said about sector-specific CRB checks. That is certainly something that a number of witnesses have said they would find helpful. May I ask about the effect on organisations like the Scouts? Girlguiding UK also put in a submission that set out concerns about how this will work practically in terms of presenting a criminal record check to a local, often volunteer group—like the Scouts or Girlguiding UK—to look at that CRB check and take a view. Can you talk us through the kinds of issues that have been raised for your organisation?
Diana Johnson (Labour, Kingston upon Hull North)
Just so I am clear, as it is set out in the Bill, that is the way it is going to be handled, unless the Bill is amended.
Diana Johnson (Labour, Kingston upon Hull North)
As the Bill is drafted at the moment, and that is what is before the Committee, there is no reference to 16 and 17-year-olds. I just wondered whether witnesses wanted to comment on that and whether it is something that the Bill needs to address.
Diana Johnson (Labour, Kingston upon Hull North)
I am sorry. I did not catch that.
Diana Johnson (Labour, Kingston upon Hull North)
Oh, the Minister intends to bring in 16 and 17-year-olds. We are in some difficulty because it is not in the Bill and we have not been apprised of this.
Martin Caton (Labour, Gower)
It is fortunate that I intended to call the Minister next, so perhaps we will get some clarification.
Lynne Featherstone (Liberal Democrat, Hornsey and Wood Green)
On that particular point, we have been having dialogue with the NSPCC and others about provisions in the Bill. We have indicated that we fully understand and accept the arguments about working with 16 and 17-year-olds and that they should be within the scope of regulated activity. It is one of a number of things that we are considering as amendments to part 5 of the Bill and we will give the Committee proper notice of all Government amendments in the usual way when we come to our conclusions.
May I raise one issue about supervision? It does not matter whether we are talking about a volunteer or a paid employee who is in a supervisory position—it could be a scout master for example—the supervisory role is very distinct. You referred to two or three adults who might go off into another place and be alone with children. Do you think that the person in the supervisory role has a duty of responsibility over anything and anyone who is working with children and therefore that is the key position in terms of making sure that children are safeguarded rather than a momentary point at which an adult—a parent volunteer or whoever—might be alone with children?
Lynne Featherstone (Liberal Democrat, Hornsey and Wood Green)
Do you think that leader in charge would be more or less inclined to pursue that responsibility if a box had been ticked?
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
On criminal record checks, the Bill says that there will now not be criminal record checks for people under 16. Do you have any comment on that? There were 5,000 checks made of people who were 15 or under. In your experience, were any of those criminal record checks such that information came to light that would have caused you concern about those young people?
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
Just to press you, Mr Reid, do you think that 16 is the right age at which the state should say, “This is the age from which we will ask for a criminal record check?”
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
You do not think it should be any younger. The majority of those 5,000 are 15-year-olds, for example. Perhaps that is just not in your experience. Mr Twine, has that caused an issue for you at all?
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
I think that is very helpful because it is a big change and, as I say, there were thousands of applications. If it is agreeable, it would be helpful for Mr Twine to check that, if he is offering to do so.
Martin Caton (Labour, Gower)
That would be very helpful. Thank you very much.
James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)
Just before we leave the vetting and barring arena, could you comment on the changed approach that is outlined in the Bill contrasted with the preceding approach that has been indicated in relation to the Independent Safeguarding Authority? What is the impact of lots of people having to register first under the previous arrangement? What do you think the benefits or changes will be as a consequence of taking the approach adopted in the Bill contrasted with perhaps the preceding approach that has been outlined?
James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)
Did you or the NSPCC have any concerns that by taking the formal registration requirement—I heard what you said about vetting being one part of the process but not the whole part—it might give an impression that because somebody was registered that meant you could almost step back and relax a bit, knowing that the registration was there?
Martin Caton (Labour, Gower)
I am calling Diana Johnson now, but I am afraid that this will have to be our last question under the subject heading of “vetting and barring”.
Diana Johnson (Labour, Kingston upon Hull North)
I just want to return to the criminal records issue and I want to explore something with you. Let us refer to the very well known case of Ian Huntley and to what happened in that case. If I understand correctly, prior to his committing those terrible murders Huntley had been investigated by the police on nine separate occasions, eight times for sexual assault and rape, mostly of girls between 11 and 15. There were no convictions prior to the murders. If there was a person like that again, a standard CRB check would not disclose any of that information, would it? That person could then put themselves forward as a volunteer and if they were engaged in an activity that is not regulated and they went along with their portable CRB check to show to a volunteer group, say a Scout group or a Girl Guide group, the group would look at that check and think, “This person’s fine.” Can you just reassure me that such examples will not cause major problems?
Diana Johnson (Labour, Kingston upon Hull North)
But just on the point of regulated activity, if someone like that wants to be a volunteer they do not need to have a CRB check, do they?
Martin Caton (Labour, Gower)
I think that is a useful point to move on to our next question, which is also on criminal record checks.
Rehman Chishti (Conservative, Gillingham and Rainham)
A lot of questions have been raised about the criminal records check, in terms of the non-sensitive conviction material being disclosed. Am I right in thinking that at the moment police have the common law powers to disclose non-sensitive convictions and, linked to that, the new threshold has been changed from something that might be relevant to something that is reasonably believed to be relevant before it has been disclosed? Do you think that is the right way forward?
Rehman Chishti (Conservative, Gillingham and Rainham)
And in your view, does the system that is being put forward—from “might” to being reasonably believed—strike the right balance?
Rehman Chishti (Conservative, Gillingham and Rainham)
Do you see any problem with individuals being given a chance to see information that is held against them before it is given to the employer, and even being able to challenge it?
Rehman Chishti (Conservative, Gillingham and Rainham)
Finally, with regard to the underlying principle in terms of the interests of justice and fairness, it must be right for an individual to be able to see what is going ahead and to be able to challenge that. Is that right?
John Robertson (Labour, Glasgow North West)
On that last point about being able to challenge, you said a bit earlier that people, even though they had a pass in their checks, were subsequently found not to be suitable because of what other people in the community had been saying. How much checking is done of what people are saying to ensure that it is not just tittle-tattle?
John Robertson (Labour, Glasgow North West)
How effective are the provisions for actually updating checks? I think the best example would be what would happen if an individual had an ordinary check and you wanted to get a higher-grade check. How do you think these things sit with the new provisions?
John Robertson (Labour, Glasgow North West)
In all the bodies—I must get Mr Summerskill to come in and say something—how long does it take for somebody you want to help your organisation actually to receive the check after they have been checked?
John Robertson (Labour, Glasgow North West)
How do you think that will be affected by the fact that the individual will receive the check, when you may or may not even see it?
John Robertson (Labour, Glasgow North West)
I have a small question. Do people work for you while they are waiting on the result of the check?
John Robertson (Labour, Glasgow North West)
Would you know if they received a check that said they should not be working there? They could still be working for you because the individual receives the check and not the body in question.
John Robertson (Labour, Glasgow North West)
So you accept that is an anomaly that should be addressed?
Martin Caton (Labour, Gower)
We need to move on to the consensual gay sex provisions.
Diana Johnson (Labour, Kingston upon Hull North)
I start with a question to Mr Summerskill. Are you satisfied with the role of the Secretary of State in this procedure, or would you have preferred a route through the courts to deal with this?
Diana Johnson (Labour, Kingston upon Hull North)
What would your preference be in terms of an appeal?
Diana Johnson (Labour, Kingston upon Hull North)
Are you satisfied with that being a purely written procedure? Would you like to have an oral hearing, or an opportunity to present oral evidence?
Diana Johnson (Labour, Kingston upon Hull North)
Are you satisfied with the conditions for disregarding convictions that are set out in the Bill?
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
You said that you were happy with the Secretary of State’s role, and that you think many people would not want there to be a court aspect to this, but do you think there are some people who might want that option?
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
Do you think there is more that could be done to automate this process in terms of individuals not having to make a request?
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
That leads me on to my point. Do you think the proposed changes to the law go far enough? You referred to common law offences and imaginative prosecuting decisions by the police historically. What do you say about that?
Gareth Johnson (Conservative, Dartford)
Mr Summerskill, do you have any idea of the number of people who are likely to be affected by these provisions, and what proportion of them are likely to want to take advantage of these proposals?
Gareth Johnson (Conservative, Dartford)
You are not sure what proportion. You say you are contacted by dozens of people each year.
James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)
Mr Summerskill, some of the questions have been quite technical and focused on the Bill, but I think you have alluded to some of this in some of your responses. Can you give the Committee some impression of the impact that the disclosure of such convictions has had on a number of the individuals who have been concerned and who have contacted you? What are the real life implications?
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
Briefly going back to automation, clearly you have outlined that that is not possible in some cases because you do not know the age of the people involved. But would you know that in some cases, and therefore you could partially automate the process at least for some people? Presumably there are some issues about data protection, freedom of information and having to inform them, and they would be worried about receiving notification by post in the way that you set out.
Martin Caton (Labour, Gower)
If Members have no further questions to this set of witnesses, that brings us to the end of this part of our evidence session. Thank you very much for your contributions.
We will now hear evidence from the Local Government Association and the Welsh Local Government Association. Our first questions are about CCTV. I call Gareth Johnson.
Gareth Johnson (Conservative, Dartford)
Good afternoon, Mr Holland and Councillor Lawrence. What is your general reaction to the proposals on CCTV? Do you see a need for it? Do you have any concerns that it may in any way restrict local authorities carrying out their duties?
Gareth Johnson (Conservative, Dartford)
Can I confirm something? In a nutshell, you welcome the fact that there will be more regulation, but you feel we should be moving more into the private sector as well. Is that essentially what you are saying?
Gareth Johnson (Conservative, Dartford)
But the essence of the Bill in terms of CCTV is the proposal to have a code of practice that relates to publicly owned cameras. Do you welcome that?
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
Good afternoon to you both. Following Gareth Johnson’s question, you know as well as I do that there is no enforcement power in the code of practice, but one of the reasons why the Bill contains these proposals is the apparently widespread perception that local authorities are massively abusing their powers, and that there is, therefore, a need for this crackdown in the Bill to protect the majority of people out there who are having their freedom eroded. What is your view of that?
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
What is your view, Councillor Lawrence?
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
That is interesting. There may be a case for having one commissioner. What about the proposal in the Bill that when local authorities apply for permission to get communications data, directed surveillance or covert intelligence they will now be required to apply for judicial authority? Do you think that is proportionate? Will it encourage local authorities to do that? Will it put them off? What do you think the cost will be? What will the process be? What are your comments on those proposals?
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
I just wanted to follow up the question about the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. Are you saying that none of the stories in the press about RIPA powers being used to catch people whose dogs are fouling the pavement and about the idea of bin Stasi, to which a previous Home Secretary referred, is true?
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
That is slightly different, as he said in the evidence he gave us yesterday. He accepts that those stories about dog fouling and bin Stasi do not actually apply to his area of activity.
Mark Tami (Labour, Alyn and Deeside)
In the main, do you have councillors, MPs, or Assembly Members of all political parties asking for more or less CCTV coverage?
Mark Tami (Labour, Alyn and Deeside)
I thought it might be.
James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)
I was interested in the comments from both Mr Holland and Councillor Lawrence about the need for public confidence and support. That, in many ways, is reflected in the response to the question from Mr Tami.
Councillor Lawrence, I know you are from the west midlands and are therefore quite familiar with the Birmingham situation. Can you explain what impact that sort of issue has on public confidence in the ability of the council and the police to do the very thing that both of you have indicated you want to use CCTV to deliver?
James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)
Did that have the impact of creating suspicion about those overt public cameras and how they might be used? In other words, was there more of the impression of being spied on rather than protected?
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
Further to that, do you think that it is an appropriate state of affairs that, for example, there are apparently more CCTV cameras in a place such as the Shetland islands, which has a population of 30,000 people, than there are in the whole of San Francisco, which has a population of more than 3 million people?
Moreover, you have referred to proportionality, as many other witnesses have done. But can you say something about the false sense of security that many people get from CCTV cameras? There is the suggestion that because a CCTV camera is present it will always catch everything that happens, it will always be facing the right direction, it will always be working, it will always be focused correctly and the images will be of good enough quality.
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
Do you think there could be an impression of a sort of Orwellian atmosphere of oppression? Can I put something to you? I have been a barrister in criminal practice for 17 years and I have had recourse to use CCTV camera images in evidence on many occasions. It does not always result in conviction for the reasons—[ Interruption. ] I do not know if I have the whole Committee’s attention, but I seem to remember being relatively quiet when other questions were being asked. I think that you know the point that I am making, Mr Holland. Do you wish to say anything about it, or would you like to answer a different question?
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
Of course that is right, Councillor Lawrence, but is there not a balance that responsible, elected officials have to draw in many areas of life? Our constituents wish to be secure, but they do not wish to be spied on. That is a way of putting it, is it not?
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
Can we not sum all this up—the incident in the community in Birmingham, the concerns about CCTV spying on people, recording conversations without notifying the community, and the requests that we get from communities to have more and more CCTV—by saying that this is about engagement with local people on how we go about it, rather than shock horror numbers of CCTV cameras and saying that the oppressive state is spying on us all? I have CCTV cameras on my high street because every other town centre around there had CCTV cameras and we then had a major crime wave and the local community then demanded them. Is it not about how we manage this? This is a sledgehammer to crack a nut.
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
To follow up that point, it would be useful from your perspective for the code of practice to set out situations in which CCTV may be cost-effective. Have either of you ever done any studies on the cost-effectiveness or otherwise of the CCTV schemes that you have introduced? Clearly, they are quite labour-intensive. If they are to work effectively, you have to have a number of people sitting and looking at the cameras for 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.
Martin Caton (Labour, Gower)
We move further into RIPA territory now.
James Brokenshire (Conservative, Old Bexley and Sidcup)
On that last point, as you know, the consultation on the code is ongoing, and I am sure you will contribute to it. On the RIPA provisions, you will be aware that they came from Lord Macdonald’s review of the proposals put forward by the Government. Do you believe that the proposals strike the right balance, addressing the public’s concerns about surveillance, which is the public confidence issue, while allowing councils to tackle serious crime?
Martin Caton (Labour, Gower)
We can move on to the powers of entry provisions now.
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
Gentlemen, do you think that it is appropriate that there are 1,200 powers in England and Wales to enter a person’s home? I know that the principle of an Englishman’s home being his castle is probably long gone and buried, but we apparently have powers now to enter people’s homes to search for bees’ nests or to examine pot plants. Do you think that is appropriate or do you think that the powers of entry outlined for repeal within the provisions of the Bill have outlived their purpose?
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
Apparently so. I have not counted them all myself, but so I am told.
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
So, as far as proportionality is concerned, you can see no problem with any of the provisions that allow involuntary entry into someone’s private premises? You spoke about parliamentary scrutiny having been applied to all the previous legislation. Of course, parliamentary scrutiny is being applied to this proposed legislation as well. Do you agree that the powers of entry outlined for repeal in schedule 2 have outlived their purpose?
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
May I respectfully ask whether Mr Holland and Councillor Lawrence would mind having a look in detail at schedule 2? What it does is repeal things that are regarded as out of date. The Government then dress that up as protecting freedom. I am interested in whether actually any of the loss of the powers contained in that schedule would adversely impact upon your ability to do the jobs that you would want to do, which is the point of Mr Ellis’s question. Some of them appear out of date. It would be helpful to the Committee to know whether any of the powers of entry that are repealed would make a difference.
May I ask a question that builds on that? The Government not only have the schedule that repeals the existing powers; they have an order-making power that allows them to repeal any other power that they think is out of date, inappropriate or disproportionate. Have you had any discussions with the Government about any of this, or have you heard from them about any other powers that they think are disproportionate? Again, have you any view on the fact that the Government have a blanket power by order to take away any other power of entry? I have a question on schedule 2 and a more specific question about whether you have had any consultation about any of this or if it has just appeared out of the blue.
Martin Caton (Labour, Gower)
We would be very grateful.
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
When you do that it might also be useful if you were to say which powers you use consistently. Ninety-five per cent. of the time, you will probably have 10 powers that you are using. I suspect that we may need to ask other organisations to respond on schedule 2. For instance, I doubt that the police have used the powers under the Hypnotism Act 1952 to go into premises to see whether entertainment related to hypnotism is taking place. I am sure that you will have some interesting reading of the schedule.
Martin Caton (Labour, Gower)
If you can only remember it. You will have to be very quick because we only have one minute left.
Martin Caton (Labour, Gower)
I am sorry; I misled the Committee. We actually have five minutes, but I do not have any Members indicating that they want to ask further questions. If there are no further questions for this set of witnesses, that brings us to the end of this part of the evidence session. I thank you very much, and we look forward to hearing your further evidence.
Martin Caton (Labour, Gower)
We will now hear evidence from the AA, the RAC Foundation, the British Parking Association and the Security Industry Authority. I welcome you to the Committee.
Diana Johnson (Labour, Kingston upon Hull North)
I would like to ask about the consultation that has taken place on the proposal in clause 54 to stop all wheel-clamping on private land. As I understand it, when wheel-clamping was being legislated against in the previous Parliament there was full consultation with interested parties, so I would like to know what consultation has taken place with regard to the proposed change.
Diana Johnson (Labour, Kingston upon Hull North)
May I interrupt at that point? I think that this is the first time that removing the right to wheel-clamp has been put forward as the preferred method.
Diana Johnson (Labour, Kingston upon Hull North)
What consultation has there been on that? According to my understanding, it has never been consulted on before.
Diana Johnson (Labour, Kingston upon Hull North)
Perhaps the panel will be able to help me. I asked a question about powers already in law that have never been enacted regarding the regulation of wheel clampers. The Minister said that they had not been enacted as an interim measure before moving to the Bill because of the cost. Is my understanding correct? Would the cost of the regulation have been borne by the sector and not the Government or local authorities?
Diana Johnson (Labour, Kingston upon Hull North)
That is helpful. Thank you. I want to ask specifically about part of the clause. I am little confused about clause 54(3) and wondered whether the panel might be able to help me. If a private car parking space has a barrier, and a motorist who is not entitled to park there drives into that car park and is ticketed, as allowed in the Bill, am I right to assume that the owner of the land can put the barrier down and stop the person from leaving the car park? As well as having a ticket, they will be stopped from moving their car. Is that correct?
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
Is there a danger that the provisions in the Bill will cause rogue clampers to behave in another way? It is not simple just to put a boot on a car any more, but they will find some other means. Has anyone given that any consideration?
Gareth Johnson (Conservative, Dartford)
Can you give us clarification on a couple of points? I do not think any of us dispute that there are some rogue clampers out there, and we all want to do all we can to tackle that problem. I have heard what the British Parking Association says about clause 54, and the concerns that you have about the wording. You feel, I assume, that there should be some changes to that clause before the Bill goes to the next stage. We have also had some submissions from the AA where it was clearly said that it does not believe that there should be any changes to the clause. I wondered if we could discuss what direction you are coming from on that, and whether it is the feeling that the AA would like to see it stay as it is, unchanged, or whether it agrees with the British Parking Association that something is fundamentally wrong with the clause.
Gareth Johnson (Conservative, Dartford)
When you said in your submission that you do not feel that there should be any dilution of the clause, what you mean is—
Gareth Johnson (Conservative, Dartford)
Therefore, you would like to see it changed, but you do not want to see the principles diluted.
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
There is some recognition, then, that this provision goes a long way to addressing a decade of cowboy practice and you are happy with that. Is it not fair to say that there is a difference between wheel-clamping and ticketing, in that wheel-clamping, which immobilises a vehicle, is far more intimidating than ticketing would be? Of course, intimidation would also be possible with ticketing, but it would require the official to remain in situ to wait for the offender—I use the term loosely—to come back, whereas now, the offender can drive off and wait to be called to come back, and the intimidation happens then. There is quite a big difference.
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
I should declare an interest, because I have been clamped by a private organisation. [ Interruption. ] “Probably correctly,” Mr Tami says.
Mark Tami (Labour, Alyn and Deeside)
No, I said you probably just bought a new car.
Michael Ellis (Conservative, Northampton North)
No, I did not. Mr King, on a serious note, Scotland has not permitted clamping of this sort for 20 years; it got it right 20 years ago. What do you have to say about that? Does that example provide any useful lessons that should be reflected on, not only in respect of the provisions of the Bill but the points that you are making about ticketing?
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
I have a question for Mr Troy. To return to the barrier issue, although clearly no wheel-clamper is ever justified in extorting huge amounts of money from people, is it not the case that at least with a barrier, the driver knows that it is a barrier, as long as it is clearly indicated, and that they are going on to land where there is some control, whereas normally the issue with private land is that people do not necessarily know that they are going on to private land?
Tom Brake (Liberal Democrat, Carshalton and Wallington)
On the issue of no longer being able to take away a vehicle, what is your, and perhaps other panel members’, expectation of how a vehicle that is parked dangerously on private land will be removed, either by the police or the public authorities? How do you see that working?
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
There is unanimity about the agreement to outlaw clamping. The problem is what you put in its place in order to protect private land. I was interested in what Mr Troy said. His preference was, it appears to me, for some sort of licensed businesses operating some sort of ticketing system, so that rogue ticketing does not occur. The Government’s preference is to give new powers to the police, to local authorities and to those peculiar “others”, who are not defined. That leads us to the same thing; are we going to have others doing ticketing instead of clamping? I just wondered what the preference of the other witnesses would be for protecting private land. If we are saying it should not be clamping, what system would best enable residents, hotels or whoever to protect their private land, given that sometimes it is just a bit of open space near a railway station?
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
I am sorry, I rephrase that. You are quite right, it is to ban rogue clampers. I wonder what everyone else would say. Apart from that, was it a fair summary of your position with respect to some sort of licence system and proper implementation?
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
Using clamps or tickets—or either?
Diana Johnson (Labour, Kingston upon Hull North)
In Hull, when I was clamped, it was £250 in cash to have the clamp taken off.
Mark Tami (Labour, Alyn and Deeside)
She can’t afford to buy a new car.
Diana Johnson (Labour, Kingston upon Hull North)
Returning to the issue of police involvement, do the panel have an understanding of what happens when the police are called to remove a car from private land? Is that a cost that the police will have to pay themselves, or will they get that money from the private landowner? I want to know how it will be paid for. We know that the police have reduced budgets and are under pressure. I am trying to work out how it will work.
Diana Johnson (Labour, Kingston upon Hull North)
On the ticket that the person receives on their car, be it £100 or £200, will there be an additional amount on top? Obviously it will not be removed straight away, will it?
Diana Johnson (Labour, Kingston upon Hull North)
As a matter of interest, can you appeal the cost of the police removing the vehicle, if you are the owner of the car? Is there an appeal process for that?
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
Mr Butler, can I clarify something with your authority? In the brief it says that you carry out functions relating to licensing individuals and the voluntary approval of companies. Just for my sake, what does that mean?
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
But everyone in the industry has to be registered with your authority.
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
Everyone is registered. What percentage of the industry complies with the rules that you set out?
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
Out of nearly 1,800 immobilisers, only 28 have had their licences revoked.
Clive Efford (Labour, Eltham)
Given the volume of complaints about activities in this industry, is that acceptable?
Lynne Featherstone (Liberal Democrat, Hornsey and Wood Green)
How many of the clamping companies also ticket?
Martin Caton (Labour, Gower)
We will move on to the subject of unpaid parking fines.
Diana Johnson (Labour, Kingston upon Hull North)
Could the panel talk through the issues about making the keeper of the vehicle liable for the unpaid parking fines that may be incurred under the provisions of the Bill? Can you explain that, because it is quite difficult to fully appreciate how it will work?
Vernon Coaker (Labour, Gedling)
Jim Shannon wanted to ask the same question because he has had a lot of representations, particularly on the point Mr King has just made about the pursuit of the keeper of a vehicle rather than someone who had driven it to a particular place. Mr Shannon had to go to another meeting in the Commons, but he asked me to make sure that that was put on the record.
John Robertson (Labour, Glasgow North West)
I once got a parking ticket from London. Unfortunately I was not in London, but Glasgow. It all happened because of a cloned number plate. With this clause, if a cloned number plate was found, what can the keeper of the original car do to say, “I wasn’t there”?
Martin Caton (Labour, Gower)
If Members have no further questions for this set of witnesses, that brings us to the end of this part of the evidence session.
Martin Caton (Labour, Gower)
We will now hear evidence from Andrew Rennison, the interim CCTV regulator, and Steve Jolly, of Birmingham Against Spy Cameras.
I call Vernon Coaker to ask the first question on CCTV.