However, Lord McNally suggested in an interview with The Daily Telegraph that the new legislation would go further, in effect creating a privacy law.
He conceded that there were concerns that a privacy law had been created through successive rulings by judges. Some, such as Mr Justice Eady, have been heavily criticised.
Lord McNally said: “There was a danger that we were getting towards having privacy law by judicial decision. If we are going to have a privacy law it should be openly debated and freely decided by Parliament.”
Umm, no, I\’m not a lawyer, but I don\’t think that the courts have been making this up out of whole cloth somehow.
I have a feeling (which perhaps someone can confirm or deny) that what he judges have been doing is looking at the European humand rights stuff, that stuff which was encoded into English law under the Human Rights Act. There\’s something about a right to privacy of family life in there isn\’t there?
Which means that Lord McNally is being at best disingenuous. The judges are simply applying statute. We could go further though, pondering on whether the Human Rights Act had been freely and openly debated by Parliament for example. Even whether M\’Lord understands what he\’s talking about.
Or whether I do of course.