The House of Lords European Union Committee has said that the UK
Government's desire to see passenger name record (PNR) data used
for all serious crime and extended beyond just air travel could
force it outside an EU-wide agreement on the information.
PNR data is collected by airlines and handed to governments for
use at border patrols. Its use has expanded in the wake of
terrorist attacks on US and EU civilian targets in recent
years.
The European Union proposed last year that greater sharing of
this data be undertaken between countries, but the UK has proposed
that the framework be greatly expanded to increase the powers of
data collection and the number of purposes for which it can be
used.
The Lords Committee said that this policy risked undermining its
objective of being in control of more information and could force
the UK out of the Europe-wide agreement.
"It would be unfortunate not to be part of the EU’s own PNR
initiative, and not routinely to receive PNR data from other Member
States," said the Committee's report. "But, at least in the view of
the Government, [that would be] less unfortunate than having
unacceptable constraints on their own freedom of action."
The Government told the Committee that it believed the EU
agreement to be too restrictive. It wants to be able to use PNR
data to help to tackle all serious crime and for immigration
control; it wants to expand its reach to cover other forms of
travel other than air travel, and wants it to allow the gathering
of data on flights within the EU and even within the UK.
These uses of the data are barred by restrictions attached to
the EU proposal. "The Commission believes that the positive
obligations go hand in hand with the limitations and restrictions,"
said the Committee. "It is likely that many, perhaps most, Member
States will take the same view. The Government’s hopes of
eliminating or at least reducing the limitations may therefore not
come to fruition."
The Government can currently block the proposal because it
requires the agreement of all EU member states, but if the Lisbon
Treaty is passed then it can be passed by a qualified majority of
states.
If it were passed at that stage then the UK would have to opt
out of it, which would mean that it could no longer access data
collected by other EU member states because data could not pass
from countries within the agreement to countries outside it.
"The Government should be aware that, by attempting to extend
the purposes beyond what is acceptable to other Member States and
to the European Parliament, they may be forced to opt out of the
Framework Decision," said the Committee.
"They may then find that, on balance, the ability to use PNR
data to assist in the combating of more routine crime, including
immigration, revenue and customs offences, is insufficient
compensation for an inability to use data collected by other Member
States."
The Committee also told the Government that it should not seek
to expand the purposes for which the data is used.
"There can be no justification for agreeing legislation which
does not set out clearly the purposes for which and the conditions
under which the data may be used," it said. "Blanket expressions
such as 'organised crime' or 'serious crime' are inadequate. The
offences for which PNR data can be used must be defined as clearly
as is possible given the differing legal systems involved. If a
definition of 'serious crime' is possible for the European Arrest
Warrant, appropriate definitions can be found for the Framework
Decision."
The Committee said that it would not be possible to extend the
collection of PNR to road or rail travel, but that it could be
extended to sea travel in due course. It also said that the whole
exercise should be underpinned by clear data protection
measures.
"We believe that adequate and effective rules on data protection
should be contained in the PNR Framework Decision itself, and we
urge the Government to support this view in the course of the
negotiations," it said.
