Opposition motion to annul legal notice on student data defeated

Education minister Evarist Bartolo dispelled fears and the opposition's "hysterical accusations" that he would be abusing of personal data and insisted that the legal notice issued last month was “approved at every stage by the data protection commissioner.” 

Parliament tonight discussed the Opposition motion to revoke a legal notice granting the education minister the right to access data on students for research purposes. The motion was defeated by 37 votes against 30.

Before the debate commenced, PN leader Simon Busuttil said the legal notice “breached individual privacy rights” and hit out at government for failing to keep its word to consult the opposition on the matter.

The vote on the motion will be taken at the end of the two-and-a-half hour debate together with the Civil Unions Bill vote and the amendment to the Constitution widening protection to LGBTI persons.

Accusing the opposition of “demonising” the legal notice and himself, education minister Evarist Bartolo dispelled fears that the legal notice would grant him any new powers. The legal notice was published on 4 March and the debate was held urgently before the timeframe to amend or revoke the legal notice.

Bartolo insisted that the law already grants the education minister access to data on students, however he reassured that the data would be used “to protect the most vulnerable children and students in our society.”

 “I have no qualm in being my brother’s keeper but this talk of playing Big Brother is nonsense,” Bartolo said, in reply to opposition MP Joe Cassar who accused government of playing big brother after quoting George Orwell’s masterpiece Nineteen Eighty-Four.

The minister said the data would be used to approach students who would have dropped out of school or other formal programmes of education.

Explaining that the education ministry held lengthy talks with the data protection commissioner, starting in September 2013, Bartolo said the former commissioner Joseph Ebejer had approved the draft legal notice in December 2013.

“We consulted all relevant authorities and contrary to the opposition’s accusations, we have nothing to hide,” Bartolo said, adding that confidential data is currently collected by the country’s educational institutions and this is used to address a series of problems such as early-school leavers and post-graduate job opportunities. 

“Attributing evil intentions to this legal notice is nonsense. We only intend to use the data to help the most vulnerable of students and we surely have no intention of spying on children or hurting anyone,” he added. 

Good intentions not enough

The opposition’s deputy leader Mario de Marco said that he had no doubt that the education minister had good intentions; however he said that the issue goes beyond intentions.

However, he insisted that “nobody should live in fear that somebody else is controlling or using their personal data.”

Noting that the State had the right to collect data for a number of purposes especially citizen protection, de Marco said that the legal notice gave the minister the right to access individual students’ data.

“As good as the minister’s intentions are, the powers are excessive and the minister can build a student profile. I ask, who will have access to this information? Will the students’ parents be asked to give consent? For how long will this information be kept? What safeguards are in place that the information is used for good purposes? Why has the power been transferred to the minister instead of a central statistical or education institution?”

Acknowledging that in modern society, citizens are under constant surveillance, de Marco said that the opposition 

In his address to Parliament, opposition MP and author of the motion to annul the legal notice, Joe Cassar asked whether the legal notice would also apply for independent schools, adding that “the minister is legally taking over the power to control the data.”

He explained that the opposition was opposed to giving the education minister access to personal data, including ID card numbers. “Why does the minister need to identify individual students thanks to this information?”

Cassar said that the data also includes gender, date of birth and other personal details which gives the minister “absolute power” to query about any individual on the database.

“Why would the minister want to know the abilities of Joe or Mary? There’s nothing wrong in having access to collective data, but certainly the minister should not have access to data of an individual student, without the parents’ consent. It’s clear that the intention of this legal notice is to enable the education minister to create student profiles,” Cassar said. 

New data protection commissioner

Accusing opposition MP Claudette Buttigieg of “putting up a show” and ridiculing herself for asking whether the new data protection commissioner would be one of the persons who appeared on Labour’s electoral billboards, civil liberties minister Helena Dalli announced that the new commissioner had been chosen in agreement with the opposition leader Simon Busuttil.

Causing a bit of a stir among opposition MPs, Dalli said: “Didn’t your leader inform you that a new data protection commissioner will be appointed on Wednesday and he has agreed with the prime minister on the nomination? Dear leader of the opposition, didn’t you consult your own MPs before agreeing on the new commissioner?”

Law gives government Big Brother powers

Concluding the debate, opposition leader Simon Busuttil said the education minister gifted himself a “blank cheque” and the law made him the data controller of personal and private details.

He said that the PN would not stop at anything and was ready to take the case to the European Court of Human Rights to revoke the legal notice and protect children’s’ privacy.

This legal notice, Busuttil insisted gave the education minister Big Brother powers which raised a number of questions on the people’s privacy.

“This law is wrong because it breaches our children’s fundamental right to privacy,” Busuttil said, adding that government’s intention to track student trends did not call for a legal notice that gave the minister “disproportionate powers.”

Stressing that the minister now had a right to ask for “data which isn’t necessary for his declared intentions without the students or their parents’ consent,” Busuttil said that government was snatching the power of citizens to control their personal data.

“The legal notice does not limit the minister’s powers and does not introduce any safeguards,” Busuttil said, asking who and how the data would be used.

While noting that the opposition did not doubt the minister’s intentions, Busuttil added “The government believes that its ministers should be in control of this data, however what guarantees are we being given that this data will not be abused of.”

He added that it was an “irony” that government would be posing as the champion of civil rights by voting for the civil rights bill while approving a law which breached children’s rights.