4 The Internet of Things
| (30709)
11223/09
COM(09) 278
| Commission Communication: Internet of Things (IoT) — An action plan for Europe
|
| Legal base | — |
| Department | Business, Innovation and Skills
|
| Basis of consideration | Minister's letter of 22 January 2009
|
| Previous Committee Report | HC 19-xxxi (2008-09), chapter 6 (11 November 2009); and HC 19-xxv (2008-09), chapter 2 (21 July 2009); also see (30708) 11222/09: HC 19-xxv (2008-09), chapter 1 (21 July 2009); (30001) 13737/08: HC 16-xxxiii (2007-08), chapter 6 (29 October 2008); (28475) 7544/07 : HC 41-xxi (2006-07), chapter 10 (9 May 2007); and (27466) 8841/06 HC 41-xxi (2006-07), chapter 15 (9 May 2007)
|
| To be discussed in Council | To be determined
|
| Committee's assessment | Politically important
|
| Committee's decision | Cleared (decision reported on 11 November 2009); further information now provided
|
Background
4.1 In the executive summary to its 2005 Report "The
Internet of Things" (the IoT), the International Telecommunications
Union said that "embedding short-range mobile transceivers
into a wide array of additional gadgets and everyday items, enabling
new forms of communication between people and things, and between
things themselves [meant that] ….a new dimension has been
added to the world of information and communication technologies
(ICTs): from anytime, any place connectivity for anyone,
we will now have connectivity for anything".
The Commission Communication
4.2 The Communication says that, since these technical advances
will happen, simply leaving the development of IoT to the private
sector, and possibly to other world regions is
not a sensible option in view of the deep societal changes that
IoT will bring about. By adopting what the Commission calls "a
proactive approach", Europe "could play a leading role
in shaping how IoT works and reap the associated benefits in terms
of economic growth and individual well-being, thus making the
Internet of things an Internet of things for people." Failing
to do so as being to miss an important opportunity that "could
place Europe into a position where it is forced to adopt technologies
that have not been designed with its core values in mind, such
as the protection of privacy and personal data." So, "by
launching a number of actions and reflections, the Commission
intends to be a driving force behind this effort and it invites
the European Parliament, the Council and all concerned stakeholders
to work jointly to achieve these ambitious yet achievable objectives."
The Commission proposes 14 "Lines of Action", all of
which are described in our previous-but-one Report.
4.3 The then Minister
said that that the Government's view was "mainly one of support
for the EU Commission work in this policy area"; the Commission
was "right to view this technology as a potential economic
and social enabler"; but "as highlighted in the Communication
there are a number of policy challenges around data/protection,
governance and fully supporting research and development into
Internet of Things technologies like RFID and other near-field
communication technologies."
4.4 The Committee felt that he did not explain
this last comment altogether clearly, and asked him a number of
questions. In the meantime the Communication was retained under
scrutiny. [11]
The Commission Recommendation
4.5 In an earlier letter of 27 May 2009, the
then Minister had referred to the earlier Commission Communication,
"RFID in Europe: Steps Towards a Policy Framework",
which he said included a Commission decision to establish "a
legal framework that set effective safeguards for data protection
and privacy was essential to encourage take-up of RFID technology",
and its intention to produce a non-binding Recommendation at a
later stage, and said that the European Commission had published
a Recommendation on the implementation of privacy and data protection
principles in applications supported by radio-frequency identification
(RFID) on 12 May 2009.[12]
4.6 The then Minister explained that, through
an EU RFID Experts Group (which included a UK representative),
it was possible to feed directly to the Commission the strong
concerns of UK Retailers about the disproportionate costs that
would be incurred in removing all tags at checkouts. The Recommendation
now stipulated that a framework for safeguarding privacy and personal
data needed to be developed to provide guidance to operators on
their use of RFID; it did not, however, create new legal obligations
but aimed to provide clarity on existing obligations under data
protection legislation. Retailers would have to provide a kiosk
in store for tags to be removed, but large retailers indicated
that they were content to do so and small retailers were excluded
from the scope of the Recommendation. The Commission was now encouraging
Member States' stakeholders to be involved in the preparation
codes of conduct and best practice to manage privacy and security
measures and to raise awareness of the risks and benefits of RFID
technology. The UK was already doing a lot in this area —
two regional RFID centres tasked with promoting the take up and
use of RFID technology and chairing the Raising Awareness and
Competitiveness in Europe RFID Network (RACE RFID), which aimed
to provide a network of excellence in Member States in the development,
adoption and usage of RFID. Member States had two years to inform
the Commission on the steps they intended to take to meet the
objectives of the Recommendation. Within three years the Commission
would report on the Recommendation's implementation and produce
analysis on the impact to companies, public authorities and on
citizens. The Minister undertook to send the Committee a copy
of the UK's report back to the Commission.
Our assessment
4.7 The answers, from his successor, the Minister
for Digital Britain (Stephen Timms) are set out in our previous
Report. In the Committee's view, all were satisfactory and the
Communication was therefore cleared.
4.8 We noted that, as Article 249EC made clear,
a Commission Recommendation, is non-binding. However, in the Committee's
view, its inclusion, along with Regulations, Directives and Decisions,
among the provisions enabling the European Parliament, the Council
and the Commission to carry out their tasks in accordance with
the Treaty, nonetheless suggested that its content was likely
to be important — as was the case in this instance. Moreover,
this Recommendation was drafted in terms that would make it difficult
for any Member State not to act accordingly. We therefore suggested
that this was one of those cases in which the Minister might have
usefully exercised his discretion under subsection (1)(vi) of
Standing Order 143,[13]
and deposited it for scrutiny. We accordingly also suggested that
he and his officials should look at any further such Recommendations
from this perspective.
4.9 We also took this opportunity to note that
we did not regard the present alternative — a copy of a
letter to our counterparts in the House of Lords — as an
adequate means of correspondence with this Committee, and asked
that all future correspondence with the Committee from him and
other Ministers in the Department for Business, Innovation and
Skills be directly with it.
4.10 Looking further ahead, we also asked the
Minister to send the Committee not only a copy of its report to
the Commission on the steps that it would take to meet the objectives
of the RFID recommendation, but also the Commission's subsequent
report on the implementation and impact, along with his views
on it, particularly with respect to UK companies, public authorities
and citizens.[14]
The Minister's letter of 22 January 2010
4.11 In his letter, the Minister says that he
has noted the Committee's comments on Commission Recommendations
and will ensure that they are taken into account when depositing
documents in the future.
4.12 He also undertakes to ensure that the Committee
receives a copy of the report to the Commission setting out the
steps that the UK will be taking to meet the objectives of the
RFID Recommendations and the Commission's subsequent report. He
anticipates that this will be ready either at the end of 2010
or in early 2011, after the Commission has published its final
opinion on how Member States should implement the Recommendations.
4.13 The Minister goes on to report that the
Commission is currently taking views and contributions from European
wide industry and Member States via the RACE (Raising Awareness
and Competitiveness in Europe) working group set up to spearhead
work on the deployment of RFID and, consequently, on the Recommendations.
The Recommendations are, the Minister says, considered to be an
essential policy instrument that provides guidance on how to deploy
RFID in a way that respects privacy but calls for further work
to be done on awareness raising, codes of practice, on measures
of transparency for the privacy proposals and on a template for
Privacy Impact Assessments to be carried out; Member States will
be expected to follow the lead set by RACE.
4.14 In the UK, the Minister notes that his Department
has convened an RFID Working Group comprising UK Government officials,
UK RFID industry members, UK civil society members and RACE/European
Commission representatives:
"There was an initial meeting held in December
to discuss issues raised by the Recommendations on privacy and
data protection that impact upon the deployment of RFID based
systems. The particular objectives for the meeting were:
1. to seek general views/feedback from interested
players.
2. to facilitate discussion on the issues of
privacy and data protection.
3. to discuss the level and substance of awareness
which dominates the RFID arena/debate.
4. to seek guidance from the Commission representatives
on any specific actions required of government.
"BIS will hold quarterly meetings of this RFID
Working Group until such time as the Recommendations have been
implemented in the UK in keeping with the Commission's Recommendations.
At the next meeting scheduled for February 2010 allocation of
ownership/responsibility to members of the group for the individual
Recommendations will be carried out. The possibility of a subset
of working groups is envisaged. Particular attention is being
paid to the Privacy Impact Assessment being drawn up by the Commission.
The UK is seeking the views of civil society leaders and a range
of industry players such as manufacturers of RFID, distributors
and retailers on how best to proceed with a Privacy Impact Assessment
that fits the requirements of UK industry and consumers.
"We are acutely aware of the need for RFID to
be taken up more widely in the UK but with robust transparent
privacy and data protection safeguards. All members of the RFID
Working Group are committed to this objective."
Conclusion
4.15 We are grateful to the Minister for this
further information, which we are reporting to the House.
4.16 We look forward to receiving the report
to the Commission setting out the steps that the UK will be taking
to meet the objectives of the RFID Recommendations and the Commission's
subsequent report in due course.
4.17 We also note with appreciation his undertaking
regarding the future deposit of Commission Recommendations.
11 See headnote: HC 19-xxv (2008-09), chapter 2 (21
July 2009). Back
12
This is available at http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/policy/rfid/documents/recommendationonrfid2009.pdf. Back
13
The relevant part of the Committee's Standing Order reads:
"The expression "European
Union document" covers -
i) any proposal under the Community
Treaties for legislation by the Council or the Council acting
jointly with the European Parliament;
ii) any document which is published
for submission to the European Council, the Council or the European
Central Bank;
iii) any proposal for a common strategy,
a joint action or a common position under Title V of the Treaty
on European Union which is prepared for submission to the Council
or to the European Council;
iv) any proposal for a common position,
framework decision, decision or a convention under Title VI of
the Treaty on European Union which is prepared for submission
to the Council;
v) any document (not falling within
(ii), (iii) or (iv) above) which is published by one Union institution
for or with a view to submission to another Union institution
and which does not relate exclusively to consideration of any
proposal for legislation;
vi) any other document relating to
European Union matters deposited in the House by a Minister of
the Crown. Back
14
See headnote: HC 19-xxxi (2008-09), chapter 6 (11 November 2009). Back
| 
