BREXIT could damage the ability of police and security agencies to share information with European Union counterparts unless transitional arrangements are put in place, peers have warned.
Private firms, particularly in the services industry vital to the UK economy, will also be hit if there is a “cliff edge” when the UK leaves the EU’s data protection arrangements.
A cross-party House of Lords committee report hit out at the “lack of detail” produced by the Government on how it plans to ensure that data transfers can continue between the UK and EU after Brexit.
The EU Home Affairs sub- committee said the UK should seek to ensure that the Commission agrees an adequacy arrangement, certifying that the UK’s data protection is in line with that set by Brussels, allowing data transfers to continue.
But as such an agreement can only be signed with a third country, both sides will need to agree a transitional system to bridge the gap until a UK-EU deal can be reached after Brexit, or face the consequences of being unable to share information in the same way.
The peers warned: “In the absence of such transitional arrangements, the lack of tried-and-tested fallback options for data-sharing in the area of law enforcement would raise concerns about the UK’s ability to maintain deep police and security co- operation with the EU and its member states in the immediate aftermath of Brexit.”
There would also be a commercial impact from the “cliff edge” scenario of leaving the EU without transitional arrangements and subsequent adequacy agreement.
“Our analysis suggests that the stakes are high, not least because any post-Brexit arrangement that results in greater friction around data transfers between the UK and the EU could present a non-tariff trade barrier, putting the UK at a competitive disadvantage,” the report said.
The peers noted that the Government’s aim of maintaining “unhindered” data flows with the EU after Brexit could require the UK to continue to align its data protection rules with those set in Brussels, which it no longer has a say over.
Former diplomat Lord Jay, the committee’s chairman, said: “The volume of data stored electronically and moving across borders has grown hugely over the last 20 years.
“Between 2005 and 2012 alone, internet traffic across borders increased 18-fold.
“The maintenance of unhindered data flows is therefore crucial, both for business and for effective police co-operation.
“The committee was concerned by the lack of detail on how the Government plans to maintain unhindered data flows post-Brexit. It was concerned, too, by the risk that EU and UK data protection rules could diverge over time when the UK has left the EU.
“To avoid this, the committee urges the Government to secure a continuing role for the Information Commissioner’s Office on the European Data Protection Board.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here