Reports & recommendations

92 recommendations, each with the government response on the record. Filter by government response or delivery status.

Recommendations (5)

L25
Noted

ICO and Regulatory Membership

Recommendation
In any reconsideration of the powers of the Information Commissioner (or replacement body), power should be given to that body to determine that membership of a satisfactory regulatory body, which required appropriate governance and transparency standards from its members in …
In brief (written by this site)

The Inquiry recommended taking regulatory body membership into account during data protection enforcement. In January 2013, the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) acknowledged "the importance of Lord Justice Leveson’s recommendations about the recognition the ICO might be able to give" (Information Commissioner’s Office response, Jan 2013). The response does not mention statutory powers or considering membership when taking enforcement steps (Information Commissioner’s Office response, Jan 2013).

Information Commissioner · 07 Jan 2013 Noted
Words of: Information Commissioner’s Office, institutional response in The Information Commissioner’s Response to the Leveson Report, 7 January 2013
We also acknowledge the importance of Lord Justice Leveson’s recommendations about the recognition the ICO might be able to give
Read full response to L25 (opens in a new tab)
Information Commissioner (Primary)
View details of L25
L48
Noted

Section 32 DPA Amendment

Recommendation
The exemption in section 32 of the Data Protection Act 1998 should be amended so as to make it available only where: (a) the processing of data is necessary for publication, rather than simply being in fact undertaken with a …
In brief (written by this site)

The Inquiry recommended amending the Data Protection Act exemption for journalism. In December 2017, Lord Keen of Elie, Advocate-General for Scotland, responding for the UK Government, addressed the recommendation regarding special weighting, stating that weighting for freedom of expression and information was "an essential way of ensuring that information that is in the public interest is not buried" (Lord Keen of Elie, Dec 2017). In November 2012, Prime Minister David Cameron stated that proposals reducing the special treatment afforded to journalists under data protection legislation required careful consideration (David Cameron response, Nov 2012; David Cameron, Nov 2012).

Prime Minister's Office, 10 Downing Street · 29 Nov 2012 Noted
Words of: David Cameron, Prime Minister, statement to the House of Commons on the Leveson Inquiry report, 29 November 2012 (HC Deb vol 554 cols 446-448)
In support of this, Lord Justice Leveson makes some important proposals. First, he proposes some changes to the Data Protection Act that would reduce the special treatment that journalists are afforded when dealing with personal data. We must consider this very carefully, particularly the impact that it could have on investigative journalism. Although I have been able to make only preliminary investigations about that proposal since reading the report, I am instinctively concerned about it.
Read full response to L48 (opens in a new tab)
UK Government (Primary)
View details of L48
L49
Noted

Narrow Section 32 Exemption Scope

Recommendation
The exemption in section 32 of the Data Protection Act 1998 should be narrowed in scope, so that it no longer allows, by itself, for exemption from: (a) the requirement of the first data protection principle to process personal data …
In brief (written by this site)

The Inquiry recommended narrowing the scope of data protection exemptions available to journalists. In December 2017, Lord Keen of Elie, Advocate-General for Scotland, stated for the UK Government that the Data Protection Bill protected journalists relying on exemptions for public interest journalism regardless of regulator membership, though the specific restrictions named in the recommendation were not mentioned (Lord Keen of Elie, Dec 2017). Earlier, in November 2012, Prime Minister David Cameron told the House of Commons that proposals reducing special data protection treatment for journalists required careful consideration regarding their potential effect on investigative journalism (David Cameron response, Nov 2012; David Cameron, Nov 2012).

Prime Minister's Office, 10 Downing Street · 29 Nov 2012 Noted
Words of: David Cameron, Prime Minister, statement to the House of Commons on the Leveson Inquiry report, 29 November 2012 (HC Deb vol 554 cols 446-448)
In support of this, Lord Justice Leveson makes some important proposals. First, he proposes some changes to the Data Protection Act that would reduce the special treatment that journalists are afforded when dealing with personal data. We must consider this very carefully, particularly the impact that it could have on investigative journalism. Although I have been able to make only preliminary investigations about that proposal since reading the report, I am instinctively concerned about it.
Read full response to L49 (opens in a new tab)
UK Government (Primary)
View details of L49
L51
Noted

Repeal Procedural Provisions

Recommendation

The procedural provisions of the Data Protection Act 1998 with special application to journalism in: (a) section 32(4) and (5) (b) sections 44 to 46 inclusive should be repealed.

In brief (written by this site)

The Inquiry recommended repealing specific procedural provisions for journalism under data protection legislation. In November 2012, Prime Minister David Cameron stated that proposals reducing special data protection treatment for journalists required careful consideration, noting he was "instinctively concerned" about the impact on investigative journalism, though sections 32(4), 32(5), and 44 to 46 are not mentioned in the sources (David Cameron response, Nov 2012; David Cameron, Nov 2012).

Prime Minister's Office, 10 Downing Street · 29 Nov 2012 Noted
Words of: David Cameron, Prime Minister, statement to the House of Commons on the Leveson Inquiry report, 29 November 2012 (HC Deb vol 554 cols 446-448)
In support of this, Lord Justice Leveson makes some important proposals. First, he proposes some changes to the Data Protection Act that would reduce the special treatment that journalists are afforded when dealing with personal data. We must consider this very carefully, particularly the impact that it could have on investigative journalism. Although I have been able to make only preliminary investigations about that proposal since reading the report, I am instinctively concerned about it.
Read full response to L51 (opens in a new tab)
UK Government (Primary)
View details of L51
L54
Noted

Bring into Force Section 55 Penalties

Recommendation
The necessary steps should be taken to bring into force the amendments made to section 55 of the Data Protection Act 1998 by section 77 of the Criminal Justice and Immigration Act 2008 (increase of sentence maxima) to the extent …
In brief (written by this site)

The Inquiry recommended commencing increased penalties and journalistic defences for unlawfully obtaining data. In May 2018, the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport and the Home Office stated that the provisions were omitted and never commenced, explaining that offences, defences, and penalties were instead set out in the Data Protection Act 2018 (Data Protection Act 2018: Explanatory Notes, May 2018). Earlier, in January 2013, Helen Grant, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the Ministry of Justice, stated that the Government was considering whether to introduce them given potential consequences for investigative journalism (Helen Grant, Jan 2013). In November 2012, Prime Minister David Cameron stated that the Government needed to look at the issue very carefully (David Cameron response, Nov 2012; David Cameron, Nov 2012).

Prime Minister's Office, 10 Downing Street · 29 Nov 2012 Noted
Words of: David Cameron, Prime Minister, statement to the House of Commons on the Leveson Inquiry report, 29 November 2012 (HC Deb vol 554 cols 446-448)
I think we need to look at this very carefully. Lord Justice Leveson is incredibly tough about what he sees as the failures to act on the Information Commissioner’s report. We need to look very carefully at that, as well as at my hon. Friend’s point.
Read full response to L54 (opens in a new tab)
UK Government (Primary)
View details of L54