Debate contribution: The Data (Use and Access) Act 2025

Debate contribution by Mr John O'Dowd on .

MLA
Mr John O'Dowd
Party at the time
Sinn Féin
Date
30 June 2025
Type
Debate contribution (made as a minister)
Business
Executive Committee Business
Heading
The Data (Use and Access) Act 2025
Assembly identifier
Official Report component 5043668

Read the official Assembly record

Text

I beg to move

Go raibh maith agat, a Phríomh-Leas-Cheann Comhairle.

I welcome the opportunity to introduce the motion. At the outset, I must address the procedural context of our current situation. As you are aware, the Sewel convention stipulates that the Westminster Parliament should not legislate in devolved areas without the consent of the devolved legislatures. Unfortunately, the legislative consent memorandum process was not completed on schedule. The delay was primarily caused by the British Government's reluctance to share the complete article 2(1) Windsor framework assessment on the Bill. The Data (Use and Access) Bill was a complex matter and required the need to seek clarity on the Bill's implications for the post-Brexit Windsor framework and to assess the views offered on the proposed legislation by the Human Rights Commission. I regret that the matter was not brought to the Committee for Finance and to the House sooner. The delay in laying the legislative consent motion (LCM) is not a situation that we should have found ourselves in. My officials are committed to ensuring that it does not happen again. That said, the Act was passed at Westminster, receiving Royal Assent on 19 June. The provisions affecting devolved matters are now law. Our task is to ensure that their implementation is done in a way that respects our devolved competencies and serves the best interests of our people. The British Government's aim with the Act is to improve how data is accessed, shared and used here and across England, Scotland and Wales. The Act contains three provisions that intersect with devolved competencies. I will outline those devolved areas and explain their implications. The first devolved area that is impacted on by the Act is the introduction of the smart data schemes. The schemes are designed to give consumers greater control over their personal data by enabling them to authorise trusted third parties to access and use that data on their behalf. It is a consumer empowerment initiative that aims to allow individuals to seamlessly switch service providers, compare offers and access tailored services in sectors such as banking, energy and telecommunications. The goal is to foster competition, drive innovation and improve outcomes for consumers. Under the Act, the Secretary of State or the Treasury is empowered to establish the schemes through regulations. However, the implementation of smart data schemes touches on consumer protection, economic regulation and digital services: areas that fall within the competence of the Assembly. Therefore, the application of the Act must reflect our local regulations. Any smart data scheme introduced here must align with our consumer priorities, economic strategy and digital inclusion goals. That presents an opportunity for us to be at the forefront in the ethical and effective use of consumer data. However, it also necessitates careful oversight to ensure that devolved powers are maintained and that citizens' rights are safeguarded. The Minister for the Economy holds responsibility for smart data schemes. DFE has consulted throughout the drafting of the Bill, and its views have been considered. It has not raised any concerns about the relevant devolved provisions. The second devolved area affected by the Act is the establishment of the National Underground Asset Register (NUAR). The initiative seeks to create a comprehensive digital map of underground infrastructure: pipes, cables, ducts and other buried assets. The aim is to reduce accidental damage caused during street works, improve safety and streamline planning and maintenance. Street works and the regulation of underground apparatus are devolved matters. Currently, Executive Ministers have regulation powers in that area. The Act will make those powers concurrently exercisable by the Secretary of State, enabling the British Government to implement NUAR across all regions, including here. While the goal of NUAR is to reduce disruption, lower costs and enhance public safety, it presents constitutional and practical considerations due to the concurrent exercise of powers. The Act acknowledges the unique infrastructure and governance needs of the devolved regions by mandating formal consultation with devolved Administrations before any substantial changes to NUAR protocols. However, we must ensure that its implementation is conducted in collaboration with the Executive. Our local authorities, utilities and infrastructure providers must be fully engaged. The data must be accurate, secure and accessible. The governance of the register must reflect our devolved responsibilities. Responsibility for NUAR lies with the Minister for Infrastructure. DFI has engaged throughout the drafting of the Bill and its views have been considered. It has not raised any concerns about the relevant devolved provisions. The third devolved area that is impacted on by the Act is the amendment to section 35 of the Digital Economy Act 2017, which governs data sharing between public bodies for the benefit of individuals and households. The amendment expands the scope of the data sharing gateway, allowing Ministers to make regulations that enable the disclosure of information between specified bodies for a broader range of objectives, including improving the delivery of public services, targeting support to vulnerable groups and enhancing administrative efficiency. That is particularly relevant to devolved areas, such as healthcare, education, housing and social services, all of which rely on timely and accurate data to function effectively. The expanded data sharing provisions have the potential to ensure the coordination and delivery of public services. By enabling relevant agencies to access and share appropriate information, the system can reduce duplication, enhance service efficiency and support more timely and informed decision-making across sectors such as health, education and social care. Those powers must be accompanied by appropriate safeguards. Data sharing must comply with legal and ethical standards as well as data protection regulations. We must play a central role in regulating those powers. I draw your attention to the important legislative requirements that accompany the section 35 amendment to the Data (Use and Access) Act. To fully enact those changes, it will be necessary to update the Digital Economy Act 2017. During the passage of the Act through Westminster, it was intended that a legislative consent motion would be sought from the Assembly for provisions that touched on devolved matters, particularly those in part 5 of the Act, which deal with data sharing for public service delivery, research and statistics. The absence of a functioning devolved Government at the time of the Act's passage prevented the necessary legislative consent, delaying full implementation of the Act's provisions here. As a result, the British Government chose to defer commencement of certain provisions, hoping that a restored Executive would later provide consent. In some cases, such as research and statistical provisions, the British Government eventually proceeded with limited implementation to avoid undermining the consistency of data across the regions. To fully use the data sharing powers in section 35 of the Digital Economy Act 2017, we must pass local regulations to activate the section, define which public bodies can share data and adopt the UK's data sharing code of practice. Departmental officials are working to implement the necessary steps to enable those regulations to be laid before the Assembly. I ask the Assembly to note the passage of the Data (Use and Access) Act and to recognise the opportunities and responsibilities that it presents. I also ask the Assembly to note the relevant provisions of the Act dealing with smart data, the National Underground Asset Register and the amendment of section 35 of the Digital Economy Act 2017, as those matters fall within the legislative competence of the Assembly.

1,233 words. Text as published by the Northern Ireland Assembly.

Assessment

Not flagged

Jev’s structured answers met the documented threshold for “not flagged”.

  • Overall probability that the activity is being used to promote, exploit or escalate an identity-based controversy: 0.03 (flagging needs at least 0.70; at or below 0.30 is not flagged).
  • None of the five culture-war criteria was met (each was below 0.60).
  • Assessed as legitimate policy scrutiny (0.86).
  • No identity-based framing was identified (1.00).
  • Subject area: Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty.
  • The overall probability was at or below the not-flagging threshold.

This is an AI-generated assessment of the text, made against published criteria. It is not a finding of fact about the MLA or their intentions. The Assembly record itself is the fact.

Jev’s structured answers

Probability that each statement is true of this text (0 = no, 1 = yes). A criterion counts as met at 0.60 or above.
QuestionProbabilityMet?
Identity framing0.03No
Sectarian or communal antagonism0.02No
Cultural grievance politics0.01No
Dog-whistle messaging0.02No
Controversy escalation0.03No
Legitimate policy scrutiny0.86Yes
Overall judgement0.03At or below not-flagging threshold
Context and attribution (stance)
OptionProbability
No identity-based framing (chosen)1.00
Reports or questions it0.00
Criticises or condemns it0.00
Adopts it0.00
Subject area (top five)
SubjectProbability
Constitutional question, Brexit, the Windsor Framework and sovereignty0.90
No identity-related subject0.05
Irish language, Ulster-Scots and language policy0.05
Flags, emblems, symbols, names and memorials0.00
Parades, bonfires and commemorations0.00

Assessed 21 October 2026 at 13:06 UTC by jev-1.13.0 (requested as typesafe/jev) under rubric 2026.10-r9, methodology 1.9.

Disagree with this assessment?

Classifications can be challenged. A person reads every challenge, and any change is recorded publicly above with its reason.

Challenge this classification