Investigatory Powers Act 2016
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
91 Approval of notices following review under section 90
(1) In deciding whether to approve a decision to vary a retention notice as mentioned in section 90(10)(a), or to give a notice under section 90(10)(b) confirming the effect of a retention notice, the Investigatory Powers Commissioner must review the Secretary of State's conclusions as to whether the requirement to be imposed by the notice as varied or confirmed to retain relevant communications data is necessary and proportionate for one or more of the purposes falling within sub-paragraphs (i) to (vi) of section 87(1)(a). (2) In doing so, the Investigatory Powers Commissioner must— (a) apply the same principles as would be applied by a court on an application for judicial review, and (b) consider the matters referred to in subsection (1) with a sufficient degree of care as to ensure that the Investigatory Powers Commissioner complies with the duties imposed by section 2 (general duties in relation to privacy). (3) Where the Investigatory Powers Commissioner refuses to approve a decision to vary a retention notice as mentioned in section 90(10)(a), or to give a notice under section 90(10)(b) confirming the effect of a retention notice, the Investigatory Powers Commissioner must give the Secretary of State written reasons for the refusal.
91 Approval of notices following review under section 90
(1) In deciding whether to approve a decision to vary a retention notice as mentioned in section 90(10)(a), or to give a notice under section 90(10)(b) confirming the effect of a retention notice, the Investigatory Powers Commissioner must review the Secretary of State's conclusions as to whether the requirement to be imposed by the notice as varied or confirmed to retain relevant communications data is necessary and proportionate for one or more of the purposes falling within sub-paragraphs (i) to (vi) of section 87(1)(a). (2) In doing so, the Investigatory Powers Commissioner must— (a) apply the same principles as would be applied by a court on an application for judicial review, and (b) consider the matters referred to in subsection (1) with a sufficient degree of care as to ensure that the Investigatory Powers Commissioner complies with the duties imposed by section 2 (general duties in relation to privacy). (3) Where the Investigatory Powers Commissioner refuses to approve a decision to vary a retention notice as mentioned in section 90(10)(a), or to give a notice under section 90(10)(b) confirming the effect of a retention notice, the Investigatory Powers Commissioner must give the Secretary of State written reasons for the refusal.
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.
Sign in to file itThink it through
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.