Protect Your Data Watch

I didn’t know what to expect when I turned on the feed to watch the parliamentary debate on the Coroners and Justice Bill. Would it be all about protecting people from terrorists? Would it be about efficiency, saving the tax payer money? How would they spin the fact that they are essentially allowing any government minister to abandon the Data Protection Act, and furthermore to allow in the same breath to change *any* act of parliament to suit their needs?

Essentially Mr Straw has created a genie in a bottle piece of legislation. It’s all powerful, its range is almost limitless (you can’t wish for data that isn’t relevant to a “policy objective”), and it’s perfectly fine to possess that genie in a bottle because only good intentioned people are ever going to give it a rub.

But the “uses” of the bill’s power wasn't the only thing misrepresented in debate.

David Howarth: The Thomas and Walport report [cited by Jack Straw as the driving force and proponent for this legislation] expressly says at paragraph 8.47 that:

“we believe this process would not be appropriate for large-scale data-sharing initiatives that would constitute very significant changes to public policy, such as those relating to the National Identity Register or the National DNA database.”

Jack Straw referenced this report (pdf) a couple of times as if it was asking for the information sharing orders that he’s proposed. This is a lie, and he has completely misrepresented what the report was really setting out to do, as it certainly wasn’t proposing a mass of databases and barely checked sharing of our data to all and sundry.

The authorisation process would not prevent the use of dedicated primary legislation in particular cases of data sharing, if it were considered appropriate for whatever reason. For example, we believe this process would not be appropriate for large-scale data-sharing initiatives that would constitute very significant changes to public policy, such as those relating to the National Identity Register or the National DNA database.

There was also important distinction made in the house regarding what is really the only “safeguard” in the whole of sections 152-154 to what data is used for.

Alun Michael: Does the hon. Gentleman agree with me[...]the requirement for balance in coming to a conclusion about whether data should be shared is clearly written into the Bill.

David Howarth: If the right hon. Gentleman is saying that a court might say that on judicial review, he is whistling in the wind. That is precisely the kind of provision that a court would say was plainly political and not for them to judge.

Given the use of words such as “fair” it is clear that the law is being opened up to interpretation here, something never good in judicial terms and certainly not good when you’re talking about reams of personal data that, by the time of going to court, are already long gone with the damage done.

Jeremy Corbyn: In [Mr Howarth's] view, is it possible that information could be shared between Departments about people’s opinions, activities and knowledge, rather than any criminal actions or convictions?

David Howarth: That would appear to be possible, because of the power to allow any person to share any data despite what any enactment says.

What isn’t noted here is that if Mr Howarth is right then information sharing orders could also STOP opinions, knowledge and information about activities from being shared between anyone it wishes. Got a major political rally against the government? Assuming they can find a policy objective there is no reason why they couldn’t prohibit you to promote it, with the bill also seemingly giving them the power to charge you with a newly created offence and imprison you for up to two years.

But what of the support, there wasn’t much of it after all…?

Bridget Prentice: I shall also be happy to meet hon. Members to discuss some of those matters [regarding data sharing] in detail, but I must say that I see data sharing as a positive thing. It will make people’s lives better because they will not have to go through 50 different gateways to get their information through to the right person.

Exagerate much Bridget? Exactly how many examples are there out there of someone having to go through 50 different “gateways” (I assume by this she means holders of data) to get their information to someone they wish to give it to? I expect the answer to be zero since anyone can simply give their data directly to whoever they wish.

I understand the real reason why they want this law, and it is probably mostly good intentioned, to enable services such as child protection to operate freely and without the consent of those that could be under investigation. And that is one example where specific and tightly regulated information sharing could be a benefit to people.

One thing’s for sure, if you ever got uppity about Brown’s presumed consent over your organs, then by god you should be really seething by now at the government’s presumption that it can do what it likes with your information.

So what’s next?

Essentially the time has not yet come to finish lobbying your MP and to try and raise interest on a more high profile stage. The second reading was ultimately an information gathering exercise given the lack of time members had to research the bill in its 232 page entirety, and so it is from here that any real changes will come about, and where the real vote in the commons will come.

As usual I’d suggest writing to your MP (just input your postcode, it lets you fill out your letter online), you can also join this facebook group to try and gain some publicity for the movement.

Now the author is dealing in top quality replica watches,to know more information about the replica watches,please visit the website:http://www.hellorolex.com.

Rolex,Replica Rolex,Rolex 2008 New Model,Rolex Datejust,Rolex Daytona,Rolex Submariner,Rolex Sea-Dweller,Rolex Day-Date,Rolex Yachtmaster,Replica of Breitling,Bell&Ross replicas,Replica Patek Philippe,U-BOAT replica,Replica Tag Heuer,Ferrari replica,Chopard replica,Graham replicas,replica Oris,Montblanc replica,Romain Jerome replica and Ebel replicas.