Results 1-20 of 726 for (in the 'Commons debates' OR in the 'Westminster Hall debates' OR in the 'Lords debates' OR in the 'Northern Ireland Assembly debates') speaker:the Earl of Northesk

Identity Cards Act 2006 (Information and Code of Practice on Penalties) Order 2009 — Motion to Approve (13 Jul 2009)

The Earl of Northesk: My Lords, I apologise to the Minister, but would he confirm that in the first instance the fees will be exempt simply for airside workers at Manchester and London City airports, rather than across the piece?

Identity Cards Act 2006 (Information and Code of Practice on Penalties) Order 2009 — Motion to Approve (13 Jul 2009)

The Earl of Northesk: My Lords, I have it in mind that the latest cost summary projected over the 10-year period from when it was issued is that 95 million ID cards would be issued. That projection is whatever that projection is, but it is something like half as much again of the population of the UK. Therefore, what faith can we have in costs if they are based on a scenario where one and a half times the...

Identity Cards Act 2006 (Information and Code of Practice on Penalties) Order 2009 — Motion to Approve (13 Jul 2009)

The Earl of Northesk: My Lords, I declare an interest as an unpaid adviser to the Enterprise Privacy Group, Privacy International and 80/20 Thinking. I have little to add to what has already been said but I invite the Minister to comment on three points. First, can he confirm that the ITAO standard requires no more than a digitised impression of a biometric fingerprint—that is to say, that the whole of the...

Data: Personal Information — Debate (2 Apr 2009)

The Earl of Northesk: My Lords, this has been an excellent debate and I thank all noble Lords who participated. I genuinely enjoyed all the contributions, including that of the Minister, although I am perhaps a little disappointed that, in relation to the Joseph Rowntree Foundation report, he may have resorted to shooting the messenger because of dissatisfaction with the message. As the debate has progressed, two...

Data: Personal Information — Debate (2 Apr 2009)

The Earl of Northesk: My Lords, in recent times it has become customary at this point in our proceedings to offer up some sort of anecdote or witticism as a means of buying time before launching forth into the body of one's text. My limited oratorical steers skills do not stretch that far, so I merely confine myself to the hope that it is neither the subject matter of today's debate nor the fact that I have risen...

Data Retention (EC Directive) Regulations 2009 — Motion to Approve (24 Mar 2009)

The Earl of Northesk: My Lords, will the Minister clarify one point? He just said that one of the purposes of the directive is to enable the Government to codify retained data. I am sorry, but if you want to codify retained data, you must access it. Will he explain precisely what he means by "codifying" the retained data?

Data Retention (EC Directive) Regulations 2009 — Motion to Approve (24 Mar 2009)

The Earl of Northesk: My Lords, I was loath to intervene on the Minister during his winding-up remarks because he has had quite enough interventions. However, can he answer one straightforward question that I actually put to him in my speech: do these regulations either implicitly or explicitly authorise the use of DPI technology to retain communications data? It is a very straightforward question.

Data Retention (EC Directive) Regulations 2009 — Motion to Approve (24 Mar 2009)

The Earl of Northesk: My Lords, I rise to support my noble friend's amendment. In so doing, I declare my various interests in this field, as an unpaid adviser to the Enterprise Privacy Group, Privacy International and 80/20 Thinking. I do not have all that much to add to my noble friend's excellent and devastating critique, but I should like to reinforce one or two of the issues to which she referred and probe the...

Parliament: Police Access — Question (11 Dec 2008)

The Earl of Northesk: To ask Her Majesty's Government under what authority the police may access the parliamentary computer system and examine Members' emails or close email accounts.

Parliament: Police Access — Question (11 Dec 2008)

The Earl of Northesk: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that Answer. Is it not the case that the suspension and/or closure of an e-mail account constitutes an interception of communications under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act? On the particular case of Mr Green, can the noble Lord explain how his account was suspended other than by means of access through the main parliamentary server?

Internet: Privacy (17 Jul 2008)

The Earl of Northesk: My Lords, can the Minister explain how the Home Office advice to Phorm found its way onto the cryptome.org website? More broadly, the Minister referred to IMP: can he explain what the interaction between IMP and the SCOPE programme will be?

Powers of Entry etc. Bill [HL] (26 Jun 2008)

The Earl of Northesk: I have one question for the Minister, which I suspect he will not have the answer to at his fingertips. As my noble friend has explained, there is evidently considerable confusion about what powers of entry lie on the statute book. What concerns me is that there are a number of non-departmental bodies, as I understand it, that have quasi-legislative powers in their own right. For example, if...

Powers of Entry etc. Bill [HL] (26 Jun 2008)

The Earl of Northesk: moved Amendment No. 3: Clause 5, page 2, line 6, at end insert— "( ) a privacy impact assessment has been carried out, in conjunction with the Information Commissioner's Office, to assess the proportionality of the power."

Powers of Entry etc. Bill [HL] (26 Jun 2008)

The Earl of Northesk: The purpose of the amendment is straightforward; namely, to require that the state's powers of entry be subject to privacy impact assessments, so that their proportionality can be evaluated. The Minister may consider that a provision such as this might impose too onerous a burden on the state. I am bound to say that, for reasons that I shall try to explain, I would find such an outcome...

Powers of Entry etc. Bill [HL] (26 Jun 2008)

The Earl of Northesk: I had hoped that the Minister might give some indication of the Government's thinking on the amendment.

Powers of Entry etc. Bill [HL] (26 Jun 2008)

The Earl of Northesk: I am grateful for the Minister's clarification of the issue and find that entirely satisfactory at this stage. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.

Revenue and Customs (25 Jun 2008)

The Earl of Northesk: My Lords, one fact in particular for me stands out from the Statement: the lost disks have yet to be located. None of us can know how much of a time bomb for the economy that may be, but does it not suggest that there is a strong case urgently to pursue the recommendation of the IPPC report? It states: "Where breaches of security are discovered, HMRC should report these promptly so that any...

National Security: Electronic Attacks (16 Jun 2008)

The Earl of Northesk: My Lords, is the Minister satisfied that advisories and patches issued by the likes of CPNI and UKCERT are issued in an adequately timely and proactive way, as, for example, with the current vulnerabilities relating to SCADA—the Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition system—and certain elements of the CNI?

Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill (5 Mar 2008)

The Earl of Northesk: I support the thrust of Amendments Nos. 146 and 148A, although, on balance, I favour the wording of the latter. I have little to add to what has been said. As has been pointed out, the Government appear to be presiding over a systemic failure to secure the sensitive and personal data that they hold about us in trust, and have an inexplicably cavalier attitude about data security and privacy....

Pensions Bill (4 Jul 2007)

The Earl of Northesk: My Lords, I support this amendment. My noble friend referred to gateway reviews. I am going to bully the Government with a specific question about that until I am blue in the face. Normally, with gateway reviews the Government claim commercial confidentiality. I signally fail to understand why the traffic-light system of gateway reviews should be subject to commercial confidentiality. That...