Data Protection Bill [HL] — Report (3rd Day) — 10 Jan 2018 at 19:04

Moved by Lord Ashton of Hyde

130: Clause 142, page 79, line 2, at end insert “to comply with the data protection legislation”

131: Clause 142, page 79, line 3, leave out subsection (9)

Moved by Lord Ashton of Hyde

133: Clause 148, page 82, line 40, after “failures” insert “to comply with the data protection legislation”

134: Clause 148, page 82, line 41, leave out paragraph (b) and insert-“(b) provide for the maximum penalty that may be imposed in relation to such failures to be either the standard maximum amount or the higher maximum amount.”

135: Clause 148, page 82, line 42, leave out subsection (6)

136: Clause 148, page 82, line 48, at end insert-“( ) In this section, “higher maximum amount” and “standard maximum amount” have the same meaning as in section 150 .”

Moved by Lord Ashton of Hyde

138: Clause 152, page 84, line 40, leave out subsection (3)

Moved by Lord Ashton of Hyde

139: Clause 153, page 85, line 27, leave out “prepared” and insert “produced”

140: Clause 153, page 85, line 42, leave out “the guidance” and insert “guidance produced under this section”

141: Clause 153, page 85, line 44, leave out “publishing” and insert “producing”

142: Clause 153, page 86, line 1, at end insert-“(7A) Section (Approval of first guidance about regulatory action) applies in relation to the first guidance under subsection (1).”

143: Clause 153, page 86, line 2, after “for” insert “other”

Moved by Lord Ashton of Hyde

144: After Clause 153, insert the following new Clause-“Approval of first guidance about regulatory action(1) When the first guidance is produced under section 153(1)- (a) the Commissioner must submit the final version to the Secretary of State, and(b) the Secretary of State must lay the guidance before Parliament.(2) If, within the 40-day period, either House of Parliament resolves not to approve the guidance-(a) the Commissioner must not issue the guidance, and(b) the Commissioner must produce another version of the guidance (and this section applies to that version).(3) If, within the 40-day period, no such resolution is made-(a) the Commissioner must issue the guidance, and(b) the guidance comes into force at the end of the period of 21 days beginning with the day on which it is issued.(4) Nothing in subsection (2)(a) prevents another version of the guidance being laid before Parliament.(5) In this section, “the 40-day period” means-(a) if the guidance is laid before both Houses of Parliament on the same day, the period of 40 days beginning with that day, or(b) if the guidance is laid before the Houses of Parliament on different days, the period of 40 days beginning with the later of those days.(6) In calculating the 40-day period, no account is to be taken of any period during which Parliament is dissolved or prorogued or during which both Houses of Parliament are adjourned for more than 4 days.”

Moved by Lord Ashton of Hyde

145: Clause 159, page 89, line 15, leave out from “compensation” to end of line 16 and insert “for material or non-material damage), “non-material damage” includes distress”

Moved by Lord Ashton of Hyde

146: Clause 160, page 90, line 3, leave out from “loss” to end of line 4 and insert “and damage not involving financial loss, such as distress”

Moved by Earl Attlee

147: After Clause 160, insert the following new Clause-“Publishers of news-related material: damages and costs(1) This section applies where- (a) a relevant claim for breach of the data protection legislation is made against a person (“the defendant”),(b) the defendant was a relevant publisher at the material time, and(c) the claim is related to the publication of news-related material.(2) If the defendant was a member of an approved regulator at the time when the claim was commenced (or was unable to be a member at that time for reasons beyond the defendant’s control or it would have been unreasonable in the circumstances for the defendant to have been a member at that time), the court must not award costs against the defendant unless satisfied that-(a) the issues raised by the claim could not have been resolved by using an arbitration scheme of the approved regulator, or(b) it is just and equitable in all the circumstances of the case to award costs against the defendant.(3) If the defendant was not a member of an approved regulator at the time when the claim was commenced (but would have been able to be a member at that time and it would have been reasonable in the circumstances for the defendant to have been a member at that time), the court must award costs against the defendant unless satisfied that-(a) the issues raised by the claim could not have been resolved by using an arbitration scheme of the approved regulator (had the defendant been a member), or(b) it is just and equitable in all the circumstances of the case to make a different award of costs or make no award of costs.(5) This section is not to be read as limiting any power to make rules of court.(6) This section does not apply until such time as a body is first recognised as an approved regulator.”

Ayes 217, Noes 200.

Debate in Parliament |

Party Summary

Votes by party, red entries are votes against the majority for that party.

What is Tell? '+1 tell' means that in addition one member of that party was a teller for that division lobby.

What is Turnout? This is measured against the total membership of the party at the time of the vote.

PartyMajority (Content)Minority (Not-Content)Turnout
Bishop1 03.8%
Con2 (+1 tell) 172 (+2 tell)64.6%
Crossbench22 1318.5%
DUP0 375.0%
Independent Labour0 1100.0%
Independent Liberal Democrat1 0100.0%
Independent Ulster Unionist0 1100.0%
Judge0 213.3%
Lab112 (+1 tell) 051.4%
LDem73 269.4%
Non-affiliated4 220.0%
UUP0 2100.0%
Total:215 19847.9%

Rebel Voters - sorted by party

Lords for which their vote in this division differed from the majority vote of their party. You can see all votes in this division, or every eligible lord who could have voted in this division

Sort by: Name | Party | Vote

NamePartyVote
Earl Attlee Contellaye
Lord Balfe Con (front bench)aye
Lord Blencathra Con (front bench)aye
Lord Aberdare Crossbench (front bench)no
Lord Bew Crossbenchno
Baroness Butler-Sloss Crossbench (front bench)no
The Earl of ClancartyCrossbenchno
Lord Green of DeddingtonCrossbenchno
Lord Greenway Crossbenchno
Baroness Hogg Crossbenchno
Lord Kilclooney Crossbenchno
Lord Pannick Crossbench (front bench)no
The Duke of SomersetCrossbenchno
Lord Trevethin and Oaksey Crossbenchno
Lord Vaux of HarrowdenCrossbenchno
Lord Woolf Crossbench (front bench)no
Lord Lester of Herne HillLDem (front bench)no
Baroness Nicholson of WinterbourneLDemno
Lord Kalms Non-affiliatedno
Lord Taylor of WarwickNon-affiliatedno

About the Project

The Public Whip is a not-for-profit, open source website created in 2003 by Francis Irving and Julian Todd and now run by Bairwell Ltd.

There are lots of plans afoot, including extensive redevelopment of the site and plans for new functionality. To keep up with what's happening, please check out the blog. We're working on updating all the contact details throughout the site, but if you'd like to talk to us about the project, please email [email protected]

The Whip on the Web

Advertisement - Helping keeping PublicWhip alive