Write the words of this act the way you think they should read. Solon shows your change as a redline against the published text and pins it to that exact text, so it can never be applied to wording you did not see.
Change 1
As published
148B Interview notices: restrictions
(1) An interview notice does not require an individual to answer questions to the extent that requiring the person to do so would involve an infringement of the privileges of either House of Parliament.
(2) An interview notice does not require an individual to answer questions in respect of a communication which is made—
(a) between a professional legal adviser and the adviser’s client, and
(b) in connection with the giving of legal advice to the client with respect to obligations, liabilities or rights under the data protection legislation.
(3) An interview notice does not require an individual to answer questions in respect of a communication which is made—
(a) between a professional legal adviser and the adviser’s client or between such an adviser or client and another person,
(b) in connection with or in contemplation of proceedings under or arising out of the data protection legislation, and
(c) for the purposes of such proceedings.
(4) In subsections (2) and (3), references to the client of a professional legal adviser include references to a person acting on behalf of the client.
(5) An interview notice does not require an individual to answer questions if doing so would, by revealing evidence of the commission of an offence, expose the individual to proceedings for that offence.
(6) The reference to an offence in subsection (5) does not include an offence under—
(a) this Act;
(b) section 5 of the Perjury Act 1911 (false statements made otherwise than on oath);
(c) section 44(2) of the Criminal Law (Consolidation) (Scotland) Act 1995 (false statements made otherwise than on oath);
(d) Article 10 of the Perjury (Northern Ireland) Order 1979 (S.I. 1979/1714 (N.I. 19)) (false statutory declarations and other false unsworn statements).
(7) A statement made by an individual in response to an interview notice may not be used in evidence against that individual on a prosecution for an offence under this Act (other than an offence under section 148C) unless in the proceedings—
(a) in giving evidence the individual provides information inconsistent with the statement, and
(b) evidence relating to the statement is adduced, or a question relating to it is asked, by that individual or on that individual’s behalf.
(8) The Commission may not give an interview notice with respect to the processing of personal data for the special purposes.
(9) The Commission may not give an interview notice to an individual for the purpose of investigating a suspected failure or offence if the controller or processor suspected of the failure or offence is a body specified in section 23(3) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (bodies dealing with security matters).
Your change, as a redline
148B Interview notices: restrictions
(1) An interview notice does not require an individual to answer questions to the extent that requiring the person to do so would involve an infringement of the privileges of either House of Parliament.
(2) An interview notice does not require an individual to answer questions in respect of a communication which is made—
(a) between a professional legal adviser and the adviser’s client, and
(b) in connection with the giving of legal advice to the client with respect to obligations, liabilities or rights under the data protection legislation.
(3) An interview notice does not require an individual to answer questions in respect of a communication which is made—
(a) between a professional legal adviser and the adviser’s client or between such an adviser or client and another person,
(b) in connection with or in contemplation of proceedings under or arising out of the data protection legislation, and
(c) for the purposes of such proceedings.
(4) In subsections (2) and (3), references to the client of a professional legal adviser include references to a person acting on behalf of the client.
(5) An interview notice does not require an individual to answer questions if doing so would, by revealing evidence of the commission of an offence, expose the individual to proceedings for that offence.
(6) The reference to an offence in subsection (5) does not include an offence under—
(a) this Act;
(b) section 5 of the Perjury Act 1911 (false statements made otherwise than on oath);
(c) section 44(2) of the Criminal Law (Consolidation) (Scotland) Act 1995 (false statements made otherwise than on oath);
(d) Article 10 of the Perjury (Northern Ireland) Order 1979 (S.I. 1979/1714 (N.I. 19)) (false statutory declarations and other false unsworn statements).
(7) A statement made by an individual in response to an interview notice may not be used in evidence against that individual on a prosecution for an offence under this Act (other than an offence under section 148C) unless in the proceedings—
(a) in giving evidence the individual provides information inconsistent with the statement, and
(b) evidence relating to the statement is adduced, or a question relating to it is asked, by that individual or on that individual’s behalf.
(8) The Commission may not give an interview notice with respect to the processing of personal data for the special purposes.
(9) The Commission may not give an interview notice to an individual for the purpose of investigating a suspected failure or offence if the controller or processor suspected of the failure or offence is a body specified in section 23(3) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (bodies dealing with security matters).
One line that says what changes, such as "Halve the dog tax".
Who it helps, what it costs, what it fixes. It is what persuades people to support it.
A proposal here is not law. Support on Solon is evidence that people want the change; the official route says what it takes to make it law.
Sign in to file your proposal. What you have written stays on this page.
Ask what your change would do, who would gain and who would bear a cost, and where something like it is already law. The assistant reads your draft as it stands, cites the law and the studies it finds, and takes no side. What you file stays yours.