Hazel Blears (Minister of State (Policing, Security and Community Safety), Home Office; Salford, Labour)

When we adjourned, I was saying to the hon. Member for Hornsey and Wood Green (Lynne Featherstone) that although I could not accept the new clause because it would involve the creation of a new organisation, which would be too bureaucratic, I understood the reasoning behind it. I do not think that it is necessary to have a new body. We already have the Information Commissioner, whose role it is to protect the individual’s right to privacy by ensuring the correct processing of personal data. The Information Commissioner will ensure that the police act in accordance with their obligations under the Data Protection Act 1998. Her Majesty’s inspectorate of constabulary also has a role.

Martin Horwood (Shadow Minister (Environment), Environment, Food & Rural Affairs; Cheltenham, Liberal Democrat)

I am reasonably familiar with the data protection principles and the role of the Information Commissioner. I had not realised that it extended to vetting the use of data that are legal but may not be agreeable to public policy in such cases. That is surely way outside the Information Commissioner’s remit.

Hazel Blears (Minister of State (Policing, Security and Community Safety), Home Office; Salford, Labour)

The Information Commissioner has wide-ranging duties, responsibilities and powers under the Data Protection Act, including responding to complaints from individuals about the processing of their data, investigating the way in which data are processed by data controllers such the police, requiring appropriate remedial action from data controllers or instituting court proceedings, and encouraging the drawing up of suitable codes of conduct, often with sectoral application, for police and law enforcement authorities, for example.

Lynne Featherstone (Shadow Minister, Home Affairs; Hornsey & Wood Green, Liberal Democrat)

Individuals might not have any knowledge that their data have been supplied to someone, so how would they know that they could complain to the Information Commissioner?

Hazel Blears (Minister of State (Policing, Security and Community Safety), Home Office; Salford, Labour)

That issue is often raised in relation to the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000. The Information Commissioner takes a broad supervisory view of how the powers are exercised, and if individuals have concerns, they can raise the question of whether their data have been subject to processing.

My more substantive concern about the hon. Lady’s suggestion of a six-monthly report before Parliament is that the police have sought the powers to enable them to build up an intelligence picture of those flights that might be of interest, particularly those that form the domestic leg of an international journey. They will have a particular interest in certain routes and passenger journeys. If they have to lay a report before Parliament about the routes that they are interested in and the kind of intelligence picture that they are trying to develop, that would in many ways defeat the purpose of what they are trying to do and could well give information and assistance to the people whom they are trying to track and have surveillance over. I find it difficult to accept that.

Clause 32(5) of the Immigration, Asylum and Nationality Bill, which will apply to international journeys, will also require that the Secretary of State should specify by order what passenger, crew and service information will be required and the manner in which that information is to be provided. In that case, Parliamentary will already be aware of the specific types of data that carriers will be required to provide and how the data are to be provided.

As I say, the police will request data on routes of operational interest that have been subject to a threat and risk assessment. They would not necessarily want that information to be made publicly available. I have assured the hon. Lady that this is not a power through which people intend to get details of the 40 million or so journeys made in this country. It will be targeted,   and carried out on the basis of the threat that is posed and there will be risk assessments of the routes on which data is sought.

Lynne Featherstone (Shadow Minister, Home Affairs; Hornsey & Wood Green, Liberal Democrat)

Will the Minister give way?

Hazel Blears (Minister of State (Policing, Security and Community Safety), Home Office; Salford, Labour)

I want to make progress, so I shall simply ask the hon. Lady to withdraw the new clause.

Lynne Featherstone (Shadow Minister, Home Affairs; Hornsey & Wood Green, Liberal Democrat)

I did not expect the Minister to accept the creation of a new body. I see the point about not laying such information in public view in front of Parliament. However, it could go before the Intelligence Services Committee if there were a will to pursue the matter.

I did not get an opportunity to ask the Minister whether it was intended that such surveillance be applied to other routes. One of my concerns is that a terrorist, knowing that passenger flight information is available to law agencies, might decide not to fly and to let the train take the strain.

It was important to make the point. As we tolerate the move to speedy surveillance without oversight in advance, we are looking for safeguards and audit trails at the other end of the bargain. For the moment, I beg to ask leave to withdraw the motion.