The Safe Harbour decision was adopted by the European Commission on 26 July 2000. It recognised that US companies could ensure an "adequate level of protection" for data transferred from the European Community to the US by self-certifying to adherence to Safe Harbour Privacy Principles issued by the US Department of Commerce.
I reiterate today what I said to Labour conference earlier this week: we will fight as hard as we can to protect and preserve the Human Rights Act and we will do everything in our power to stop the Government walking away from the European Convention on Human Rights. Standing up for human rights is not just an essential part of Labour's values. It's part of our character and identity as a country.
People who are able to make decisions for themselves already have the right to do so in all other aspects of their healthcare. Campaigners argue that to refuse access to assisted dying is to deny our fundamental right to self determination. Parliament has a duty however, to balance the rights of the individual against the wider impact on others and to consider the unintended harms as well as the benefits.
On Friday 11 September, MPs will be voting on a bill. A bill which has had little media attention. A bill which has been introduced by a relatively unknown Labour MP - Rob Marris. And yet a bill which, if passed, will have profound implications for people up and down the country. It is a bill dealing with matters of life and death.
So, do we have a reasonable expectation of privacy when we are out and about in public? No. Not unless we are doing something intrinsically private. Does a child have a greater right to privacy than an adult? Well... Courts the world over, are generally more protective of the rights of the vulnerable, including children, than those of John Smith or Jane Doe.