This snapshot, taken on
10/08/2011
, shows web content acquired for preservation by The National Archives. External links, forms and search may not work in archived websites and contact details are likely to be out of date.
 
 
The UK Government Web Archive does not use cookies but some may be left in your browser from archived websites.
Cabinet Office

35. Reports by Commissioner

  1. As soon as reasonably practicable after the end of each reporting period -
    1. the Commissioner must -
      1. prepare a report about the exercise by the Commissioner during that period of the functions of the Commissioner, and
      2. give a copy of the report to the Secretary of State,
    2. the Secretary of State must lay a copy of the report before Parliament,
      and
    3. the Commissioner must publish the report.
  2. The reporting periods are -
    1. the period -
      1. beginning with the surveillance camera code first coming into force or the making of the first appointment as Commissioner
        (whichever is the later), and
      2. ending with the next 31 March or, if the period ending with that date is 6 months or less, ending with the next 31 March after that
        date, and
    2. each succeeding period of 12 months.

The Public Reading Stage was open for comments for three weeks from 15 February to 7 March 2011 and has now closed. Your suggestions will be considered by Parliamentarians as the Bill passes through the House of Commons. Thank you for your suggestions.

3 Responses to 35. Reports by Commissioner

  1. Ian Carman says:
    February 16, 2011 at 4:43 pm

    1. What does “…as soon as reasonably practicable…” mean? Determining this could occupy the courts for ages!

  2. Watching Them, Watching Us says:
    February 19, 2011 at 6:52 pm

    1) This mechanism of a single Annual Report, the publication of which could be suppressed or delayed by politicians or bureaucrats is unacceptable.

    We have seen what has happened with the Annual Reports of the Commissioners appointed under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000, which are clearly supposed to be published and laid before Parliament “as soon as is practicable” after the end of the Calendar Year which the Annual Report covers.

    There have been cases where such Reports have been over 1 year late i.e. in the period when the next Annual report was due, and were therefore only reporting on some important topics nearly 2 years after they occurred.

    2) This Clause does not permit the Surveillance Camera Commissioner to issue any Interim reports. He does not even have the RIPA Commissioners’ power to

    make any such other report … on any matter relating to the carrying out of the Commissioner’s functions as the Commissioner thinks fit.

    3) However, on a more positive note, unlike the RIPA Commissioner’s Annual Reports, there is no power for the Secretary of State to censor the Surveillance Camera Commissioner’s report.

    This Clause should be amended to force the publication of the Surveillance Camera Commissioner’s report no later than the end of June</strong. after each Calendar Year to which it refers i.e.before the Parliamentary summer recess.

    Any attempt to delay publication beyond this time should be treated as Contempt of Parliament and those responsible should be forced to resign or should be prosecuted for malfeasance in public office.

    Does a Report “laid before Parliament” by a Secretary of State count as one of the “Proceedings of Parliament”, which is therefore protected from Libel proceedings or other Judicial injunctions etc. by Parliamentary Privilege under the Bill of Rights 1688 ?

    If not, then this Annual Report must be made directly to Parliament rather than to the Secretary of State, so that it does enjoy such Parliamentary Privilege, especially if it has to be critical of the Police or Local Authorities who have access to unlimited public funds for pursuing court injunctions, sometimes simply to protect their own reputations, rather than in the wider public interest.

  3. Neil Macehiter says:
    February 22, 2011 at 6:00 pm

    Firm timescales should be defined for publication: is there any reason to believe such targets could not be achieved.

RSS Subscribe to the comments feed