HL Deb 12 July 1991 vol 530 cc1662-4

3.31 p.m.

Lord Belstead rose to move that the draft order laid before the House on 4th July be approved.

The noble Lord said: My Lords, the purpose of this draft order is to amend the disclosure provisions in the Agricultural Returns Act (Northern Ireland) 1939 and the Statistics of Trade and Employment (Northern Ireland) Order 1988.

The Agricultural Returns Act allows only the Department of Agriculture to collect information. The Statistics of Trade and Employment Order empowers any Northern Ireland government department to collect information. Information is currently collected under the order by the Department of Economic Development, the Department of the Environment for Northern Ireland and the Department of Agriculture.

The problem that the order seeks to address is that the current legislation allows only a restricted number of government departments to process information gathered under the provisions of the legislation and does not permit the use of computer facilities outside government. This is clearly a potential constraint on the Government's policy of trying to obtain the greatest value for money in the provision of services to departments. The proposed amendment in the order remedies the situation. I shall try to answer any questions that noble Lords may put. I beg to move.

Moved, That the draft order laid before the House on 4th July be approved—(Lord Belstead.)

Lord Prys-Davies

My Lords, I listened to the Minister but it is with some reluctance that we on these Benches approve the terms of the order. The Minister will know that it is an area of great sensitivity which has much troubled the House on many occasions. Indeed I recall that the House divided on the issue about three or four months ago. If information has been given to a department on the understanding that it is given for a particular purpose, then it should not be used or disclosed for another purpose. That is a principle which I believe the House values.

The purpose for which disclosure is authorised by the order is very loosely prescribed. I note that the purpose under Article 3(1) and 3(2) is not identical. I also note that Ministers speak of the right under the order to disclose to external contractors. Who are included in the term "external contractors"?

I seek to press the Minister for two assurances. First, can he assure the House that information of a personal nature, information about the profitability of an undertaking, or information which could be detrimental to the interests of the individual who gave it, will not be disclosed to a third party without the consent of the individual?

Secondly, can the Minister assure the House that the information will be disclosed only on condition of or against an undertaking that the third party will protect the confidentiality? The only safeguards in the order are the criminal penalties. I do not underestimate the value of the criminal penalty but it may be inadequate. In any event it will not undo any damage caused to an individual by the breach of confidentiality.

Clearly we are uneasy about the order. I hope that the Minister will say more about the way in which it will work and that we can be reassured.

Lord Holme of Cheltenham

My Lords, I wish briefly to add my voice to that of the noble Lord, Lord Prys-Davies, in thanking the Minister for his presentation of the order. I too seek the same reassurance; that personal information of a confidential nature will be at least as well protected as it is at present and possibly better. It is clear that the order envisages that confidential information will be handled by third-party agencies or contractors on behalf of the Government. Therefore, we on these Benches seek those same assurances and I shall be interested to hear the Minister's reply.

Lord Belstead

My Lords, I am grateful to both noble Lords for their reaction to the order. I apologise to them and to the House for the fact that it was tabled at comparatively short notice. The decision to proceed is based on seeking efficiency but it is balanced by the requirement for confidentiality. In the event that information is released to outside organisations for processing on behalf of a department—they are the type of organisations that we have in mind—the confidentiality of the information will be safeguarded by existing legislative penalties and by the contract terms and conditions under which the information is released.

Perhaps I may be a little more specific. An obvious concern is the issue of personal information. We are talking about information which, for example, from the Department of Agriculture could be concerned with land farmed by a specific farmer which affects his personal financial affairs. An obvious concern is that the potential release of corporate or personal information to organisations outside government may imply a breach of confidentiality of information relating to a company or individual. The confidentiality of any information so released would be safeguarded, first, by penalties under existing legislation which would apply to personnel in a non-governmental organisation in the same way as to civil servants. Secondly, an additional safeguard would be provided by contractual terms and conditions if it were decided to purchase computing or other services from an organisation outside government. Thirdly, personal information would be subject to the provisions of the Data Protection Act 1984. Therefore, when the noble Lord, Lord Prys-Davies, says that he trusts that the information will be at least as well protected as it is now as regards this Northern Ireland order, I unhesitatingly say in reply that this will be so.

On Question, Motion agreed to.