Amendments made: 22, page 5, line 24, after “(2)” insert “, (2A)”.
This amendment is consequential on Amendment 24.
Amendment 23, page 5, line 26, after “body’” insert—
“for the purposes of the GDPR”.
Subsection (2) of Clause 7 provides that an authority or body is only a “public authority” or a “public body” if it meets the conditions in that subsection. This amendment makes it clear that subsection (2) only affects a body or authority’s status for the purposes of the GDPR.
Amendment 24, page 5, line 27, at end insert—
“(2A) The references in subsection (1)(a) and (b) to public authorities and Scottish public authorities as defined by the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002 (asp 13) do not include any of the following that fall within those definitions—
(a) a parish council in England;
(b) a community council in Wales;
(c) a community council in Scotland;
(d) a parish meeting constituted under section 13 of the Local Government Act 1972;
(e) a community meeting constituted under section 27 of that Act;
(f) charter trustees constituted—
(i) under section 246 of that Act,
(ii) under Part 1 of the Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007, or
(iii) by the Charter Trustees Regulations 1996 (S.I. 1996/263).”—(Margot James.)
This amendment provides that the authorities listed in new subsection (2A) are not “public authorities” or “public bodies” for the purposes of the GDPR by virtue of being public authorities or Scottish public authorities as defined in the Freedom of Information Act 2000 and the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002.
Amendment proposed: 5, page 8, line 11, at end insert—
“(2A) A decision that engages an individual’s rights under the Human Rights Act 1998 does not fall within Article 22(2)(b) of the GDPR (exception from prohibition on taking significant decisions based solely on automated processing for decisions that are authorised by law and subject to safeguards for the data subject’s rights, freedoms and legitimate interests).
(2B) A decision is ‘based solely on automated processing’ for the purposes of this section if, in relation to a data subject, there is no meaningful input by a natural person in the decision-making process.”—(Brendan O’Hara.)
This amendment would ensure that where human rights are engaged by automated decisions these are human decisions and provides clarification that purely administrative human approval of an automated decision does make an automated decision a ‘human’ one.
Question put, That the amendment be made.
The House divided:
Ayes 282, Noes 310.