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
226I Initial inspection
(1) This section applies where—
(a) an intelligence service has relevant access, whether on payment or otherwise, to a set of information that is held electronically by a person other than an intelligence service,
(b) the intelligence service is considering examining the set of information electronically for the purpose of the exercise of its functions,
(c) the examination would be otherwise than in the exercise of a power conferred by a warrant or other authorisation issued or given under this Act, and
(d) the head of the intelligence service, or a person acting on their behalf, believes that—
(i) the set includes, or may include, personal data relating to a number of individuals, and
(ii) the nature of the set is, or may be, such that the majority of the individuals are not, and are unlikely to become, of interest to the intelligence service in the exercise of its functions.
(2) The head of the intelligence service, or a person acting on their behalf, may carry out an initial inspection of the contents of the set for the purpose of deciding whether, if the intelligence service were to examine it after that initial inspection—
(a) the intelligence service would be examining a third party bulk personal dataset (see section 226E), and
(b) such examination would be necessary and proportionate in all the circumstances.
(3) Subsection (4) applies if, after the initial inspection is carried out, the head of the intelligence service, or a person acting on their behalf, decides that—
(a) the intelligence service would be examining a third party bulk personal dataset (as mentioned in subsection (2)(a)), and
(b) such examination would be necessary and proportionate in all the circumstances.
(4) The head of the intelligence service, or a person acting on their behalf, must—
(a) decide whether to examine the third party bulk personal dataset, and
(b) if they decide to do so, apply for a third party BPD warrant.
(5) If the head of the intelligence service, or a person acting on their behalf, applies for such a third party BPD warrant, the intelligence service is not to be regarded as in breach of section 226F(1) by virtue of examining the bulk personal dataset if the examination is necessary for the purposes of the making of the application for the warrant.
(6) For the purposes of subsection (1)(a), “relevant access” is to be read in accordance with section 226E(2).
(7) For the purposes of this section, only a person holding office under the Crown may act on behalf of the head of an intelligence service.
Your change, as a redline
226I Initial inspection
(1) This section applies where—
(a) an intelligence service has relevant access, whether on payment or otherwise, to a set of information that is held electronically by a person other than an intelligence service,
(b) the intelligence service is considering examining the set of information electronically for the purpose of the exercise of its functions,
(c) the examination would be otherwise than in the exercise of a power conferred by a warrant or other authorisation issued or given under this Act, and
(d) the head of the intelligence service, or a person acting on their behalf, believes that—
(i) the set includes, or may include, personal data relating to a number of individuals, and
(ii) the nature of the set is, or may be, such that the majority of the individuals are not, and are unlikely to become, of interest to the intelligence service in the exercise of its functions.
(2) The head of the intelligence service, or a person acting on their behalf, may carry out an initial inspection of the contents of the set for the purpose of deciding whether, if the intelligence service were to examine it after that initial inspection—
(a) the intelligence service would be examining a third party bulk personal dataset (see section 226E), and
(b) such examination would be necessary and proportionate in all the circumstances.
(3) Subsection (4) applies if, after the initial inspection is carried out, the head of the intelligence service, or a person acting on their behalf, decides that—
(a) the intelligence service would be examining a third party bulk personal dataset (as mentioned in subsection (2)(a)), and
(b) such examination would be necessary and proportionate in all the circumstances.
(4) The head of the intelligence service, or a person acting on their behalf, must—
(a) decide whether to examine the third party bulk personal dataset, and
(b) if they decide to do so, apply for a third party BPD warrant.
(5) If the head of the intelligence service, or a person acting on their behalf, applies for such a third party BPD warrant, the intelligence service is not to be regarded as in breach of section 226F(1) by virtue of examining the bulk personal dataset if the examination is necessary for the purposes of the making of the application for the warrant.
(6) For the purposes of subsection (1)(a), “relevant access” is to be read in accordance with section 226E(2).
(7) For the purposes of this section, only a person holding office under the Crown may act on behalf of the head of an intelligence service.
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.