Feeds

ICO strengthens criticism of Government data sharing

Changes mind, speaks up a bit

Combat fraud and increase customer satisfaction

The Government's controversial plans to share personal data between departments and with the private sector are "too wide" and the safeguards "weak" according to privacy watchdog the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO).

The ICO has released its second opinion on the contents of the Coroners and Justice Bill, which proposes legalising greater sharing of information between Government departments and with outside contractors and private companies who request it.

When the Bill's proposals were first published, the ICO was less critical.

"Some have suggested that the Bill’s information sharing provisions represent an unwarranted interference with the privacy of personal information. We do not agree. The provisions of the DPA will continue to apply to the sharing of personal information whether undertaken within the scope of an information order or otherwise," said its opinion, published on 22 January.

The ICO now believes that the proposed new law poses some dangers to privacy and for Government's accountability for the processing of personal data it has collected.

"The Bill’s information-sharing provisions are too wide, and its safeguards relatively weak," it said. "The provisions should only apply in precisely defined circumstances where there is a legal barrier to information sharing that would be in the public interest."

Rosemary Jay, a privacy law expert at Pinsent Masons, the law firm behind OUT-LAW.COM, warned of similar concerns when the Bill was published.

"It would allow for information to be shared with banks or other financial institutions," she said in January. "There is no restriction on purpose of the sharing so for example it would enable the Minister to make an order empowering the tax authorities to disclose the earnings of individuals to credit reference agencies."

Jay said that such disclosures could be made without the person whose information is being shared ever knowing about it.

The ICO is also concerned that the law will allow Government to make major changes in the field of information law without consulting Parliament.

"The Bill needs an additional safeguard, to prevent the use of information-sharing orders in the context of large-scale data sharing initiatives that would constitute significant changes to public policy," said the opinion.

The Bill allows the ICO to investigate Government departments it suspects of not processing or sharing information properly through the issuing of an assessment notice.

"The Assessment Notice provisions need to be widened, so the Information Commissioner can serve an assessment notice on any data controller," said the ICO's latest opinion. "The risks can be just as great outside the public sector and the boundary lines between the sectors are increasingly blurred. The House of Lords Select Committee on the Constitution supported this conclusion at paragraph 238 of its recent ‘Surveillance: Citizens and the State’ report."

In its first and its latest opinions, the ICO stressed that the fact that there is no penalty for failing to comply with an assessment notice makes it difficult to enforce them.

"The Bill should provide for a sanction for data controllers that fail to comply with an assessment notice," it said. "It is inconsistent that whilst there is a right of appeal against an assessment notice, there is no sanction for failure to comply with one."

The ICO also called attention to a definitional problem in the Bill. It says that "a person shares information if the person…consults or uses the information for a purpose other than the purpose for which the information was obtained."

The ICO said that this definition will cause problems. "This definition of ‘information sharing’ will cause considerable difficulty," it said. "Sharing information and using it for a different purpose are quite different activities; it is possible to share information without using it for a different purpose, or to use if for a different purpose without sharing it."

"This legally convoluted definition will pose a considerable and avoidable obstacle. If a definition of ‘information sharing’ is needed at all, [this section] should be deleted from it. If there is a need to address use of information for a different purpose, and we do not believe there is, then this should be covered by a separate provision," said the ICO. 

Copyright © 2009, OUT-LAW.com

OUT-LAW.COM is part of international law firm Pinsent Masons.

SANS - Survey on application security programs

More from The Register

next story
MtGox chief Karpelès refuses to come to US for g-men's grilling
Bitcoin baron says he needs another lawyer for FinCEN chat
Did a date calculation bug just cost hard-up Co-op Bank £110m?
And just when Brit banking org needs £400m to stay afloat
One year on: diplomatic fail as Chinese APT gangs get back to work
Mandiant says past 12 months shows Beijing won't call off its hackers
Don't let no-hire pact suit witnesses call Steve Jobs a bullyboy, plead Apple and Google
'Irrelevant' character evidence should be excluded – lawyers
EFF: Feds plan to put 52 MILLION FACES into recognition database
System would identify faces as part of biometrics collection
Ex-Tony Blair adviser is new top boss at UK spy-hive GCHQ
Robert Hannigan to replace Sir Iain Lobban in the autumn
Alphadex fires back at British Gas with overcharging allegation
Brit colo outfit says it paid for 347KVA, has been charged for 1940KVA
Jack the RIPA: Blighty cops ignore law, retain innocents' comms data
Prime minister: Nothing to see here, go about your business
Banks slap Olympus with £160 MEEELLION lawsuit
Scandal hit camera maker just can't shake off its past
France bans managers from contacting workers outside business hours
«Email? Mais non ... il est plus tard que six heures du soir!»
prev story

Whitepapers

Designing a defence for mobile apps
In this whitepaper learn the various considerations for defending mobile applications; from the mobile application architecture itself to the myriad testing technologies needed to properly assess mobile applications risk.
3 Big data security analytics techniques
Applying these Big Data security analytics techniques can help you make your business safer by detecting attacks early, before significant damage is done.
Five 3D headsets to be won!
We were so impressed by the Durovis Dive headset we’ve asked the company to give some away to Reg readers.
The benefits of software based PBX
Why you should break free from your proprietary PBX and how to leverage your existing server hardware.
Securing web applications made simple and scalable
In this whitepaper learn how automated security testing can provide a simple and scalable way to protect your web applications.