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
226IB Additional safeguards for items subject to legal privilege: examination
(1) Subsections (2) and (3) apply if, in a case where protected data contained in a third party bulk personal dataset is to be examined in reliance on a third party BPD warrant—
(a) the purpose, or one of the purposes, of using the criteria to be used for the examination of the data (“the relevant criteria”) is to identify any items subject to legal privilege, or
(b) the use of the relevant criteria is likely to identify such items.
(2) If the relevant criteria are referable to an individual known to be in the British Islands at the time of the examination, the data may be examined using the relevant criteria only if the Secretary of State has approved the use of those criteria.
(3) In any other case, the data may be examined using the relevant criteria only if a senior official acting on behalf of the Secretary of State has approved the use of those criteria.
(4) The Secretary of State may give approval for the purposes of subsection (2) only with the approval of a Judicial Commissioner.
(5) Approval may be given under subsection (2) or (3) only if, where subsection (1)(a) applies, the Secretary of State or (as the case may be) the senior official considers that there are exceptional and compelling circumstances that make it necessary to authorise the use of the relevant criteria.
(6) In deciding whether to give an approval under subsection (2) or (3) in a case where subsection (1)(a) applies, the Secretary of State or (as the case may be) the senior official must have regard to the public interest in the confidentiality of items subject to legal privilege.
(7) For the purposes of subsection (5), there cannot be exceptional and compelling circumstances that make it necessary to authorise the use of the relevant criteria unless—
(a) the public interest in obtaining the information that would be obtained by the examination of the data outweighs the public interest in the confidentiality of items subject to legal privilege,
(b) there are no other means by which the information may reasonably be obtained, and
(c) obtaining the information is necessary in the interests of national security or for the purpose of preventing death or significant injury.
(8) In deciding whether to give approval for the purposes of subsection (4), the Judicial Commissioner must—
(a) apply the same principles as would be applied by a court on an application for judicial review, and
(b) consider the matter with a sufficient degree of care as to ensure that the Judicial Commissioner complies with the duties imposed by section 2 (general duties in relation to privacy).
(9) Subsections (10) and (11) apply if, in a case where protected data contained in a third party bulk personal dataset is to be examined in reliance on a third party BPD warrant—
(a) the purpose, or one of the purposes, of using the criteria to be used for the examination of the data (“the relevant criteria”) is to identify data that, if the data or any underlying material were not created or held with the intention of furthering a criminal purpose, would be an item subject to legal privilege, and
(b) the person to whom the warrant is addressed considers that the data (“the targeted data”) or any underlying material is likely to be data or underlying material created or held with the intention of furthering a criminal purpose.
(10) If the relevant criteria are referable to an individual known to be in the British Islands at the time of the examination, the data may be examined using the relevant criteria only if the Secretary of State has approved the use of those criteria.
(11) In any other case, the data may be examined using the relevant criteria only if a senior official acting on behalf of the Secretary of State has approved the use of those criteria.
(12) Approval may be given under subsection (10) or (11) only if the Secretary of State or (as the case may be) the senior official considers that the targeted data or the underlying material is likely to be data or underlying material created or held with the intention of furthering a criminal purpose.
(13) In this section “underlying material”, in relation to data contained in a third party bulk personal dataset that is to be examined in reliance on a third party BPD warrant, means any communications or other items of information from which the data was produced.
Your change, as a redline
226IB Additional safeguards for items subject to legal privilege: examination
(1) Subsections (2) and (3) apply if, in a case where protected data contained in a third party bulk personal dataset is to be examined in reliance on a third party BPD warrant—
(a) the purpose, or one of the purposes, of using the criteria to be used for the examination of the data (“the relevant criteria”) is to identify any items subject to legal privilege, or
(b) the use of the relevant criteria is likely to identify such items.
(2) If the relevant criteria are referable to an individual known to be in the British Islands at the time of the examination, the data may be examined using the relevant criteria only if the Secretary of State has approved the use of those criteria.
(3) In any other case, the data may be examined using the relevant criteria only if a senior official acting on behalf of the Secretary of State has approved the use of those criteria.
(4) The Secretary of State may give approval for the purposes of subsection (2) only with the approval of a Judicial Commissioner.
(5) Approval may be given under subsection (2) or (3) only if, where subsection (1)(a) applies, the Secretary of State or (as the case may be) the senior official considers that there are exceptional and compelling circumstances that make it necessary to authorise the use of the relevant criteria.
(6) In deciding whether to give an approval under subsection (2) or (3) in a case where subsection (1)(a) applies, the Secretary of State or (as the case may be) the senior official must have regard to the public interest in the confidentiality of items subject to legal privilege.
(7) For the purposes of subsection (5), there cannot be exceptional and compelling circumstances that make it necessary to authorise the use of the relevant criteria unless—
(a) the public interest in obtaining the information that would be obtained by the examination of the data outweighs the public interest in the confidentiality of items subject to legal privilege,
(b) there are no other means by which the information may reasonably be obtained, and
(c) obtaining the information is necessary in the interests of national security or for the purpose of preventing death or significant injury.
(8) In deciding whether to give approval for the purposes of subsection (4), the Judicial Commissioner must—
(a) apply the same principles as would be applied by a court on an application for judicial review, and
(b) consider the matter with a sufficient degree of care as to ensure that the Judicial Commissioner complies with the duties imposed by section 2 (general duties in relation to privacy).
(9) Subsections (10) and (11) apply if, in a case where protected data contained in a third party bulk personal dataset is to be examined in reliance on a third party BPD warrant—
(a) the purpose, or one of the purposes, of using the criteria to be used for the examination of the data (“the relevant criteria”) is to identify data that, if the data or any underlying material were not created or held with the intention of furthering a criminal purpose, would be an item subject to legal privilege, and
(b) the person to whom the warrant is addressed considers that the data (“the targeted data”) or any underlying material is likely to be data or underlying material created or held with the intention of furthering a criminal purpose.
(10) If the relevant criteria are referable to an individual known to be in the British Islands at the time of the examination, the data may be examined using the relevant criteria only if the Secretary of State has approved the use of those criteria.
(11) In any other case, the data may be examined using the relevant criteria only if a senior official acting on behalf of the Secretary of State has approved the use of those criteria.
(12) Approval may be given under subsection (10) or (11) only if the Secretary of State or (as the case may be) the senior official considers that the targeted data or the underlying material is likely to be data or underlying material created or held with the intention of furthering a criminal purpose.
(13) In this section “underlying material”, in relation to data contained in a third party bulk personal dataset that is to be examined in reliance on a third party BPD warrant, means any communications or other items of information from which the data was produced.
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.