My rule of thumb for Principle 5 is: "If it is conceivable that someone
might ask you for the information in the future, and it would matter that
you didn't have it, then it is still 'necessary' to keep it." I know this
just moves the issue to whether it would 'matter' - and to whom - but I do
think there can be a public interest justification for keeping information
even if the Data Subject doesn't want you to. The retention has to be
'fair', of course, which is not the same as saying that the Data Subject
must agree. (It's fair to send the kids to bed in good time when there's
school the next day. That doesn't mean they like it.)
Data Protection - especially in the public sphere - is often about balancing
different interests, so these concerns won't go away. But I must say I'm a
bit surprised that the police apparently have such ineffective data systems.
I took it for granted that the state already had this massive amount of
carefully compiled data on everyone, and the arguments were about whether
they should keep even more. Obviously not. If they did, the key balancing
safeguard is subject access, so that unfair or inaccurate data can be
challenged. What is dangerous is an efficient information system with no
system of oversight, or with significant restrictions on subject access.
Paul Ticher
0116 273 8191
22 Stoughton Drive North, Leicester LE5 5UB
I hereby require any recipient of this message not to use my personal data
for direct marketing purposes.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Peter Lane" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, December 17, 2003 9:37 PM
Subject: Re: DP weeding
> Ian makes an interesting point . . .
>
> "I had also been under the firm impression there were nationally agreed
> weeding rules for many police computing systems".
>
> There are nationally agreed weeding rules, formulated by ACPO and signed
off
> by the Information Commissioner. I was involved in one issue following
the
> introduction of the ACPO weeding rules whereby an individual had
complained
> (S.42) that their conviction (violence) was being retained on the PNC.
The
> compliance manager at the Commissioners Office made it quite clear that
> notwithstanding the fact that the retention was in line with the weeding
> rules, in this particular case the conviction should be removed as it was
> breaching the 5th principle. I do not know how the issue was finally
> resolved as I believe it went back to the ACPO Data Protection Committee
for
> consideration. In one sense it seems that the Police can not do right for
> doing wrong. I can however see the Information Commissioners point of
view
> though (they have already responded to Channel 4 news) that a judgement
> needs to be taken in each case. As Ian points out I was also under the
> impression that the type of intelligence as described in the Soham case
> could be retained by the Police as long as regular review periods were
> documented and maintained.
>
> Peter Lane
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: This list is for those interested in Data Protection issues
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Ian Welton
> Sent: 17 December 2003 20:04
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: DP weeding
>
>
> I heard with interest a comment made in a BBC news item tonight relating
to
> the Soham case:-
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3328533.stm
>
> Quote:-
>
> " 'Differing interpretations'
> The second weakness related to the 1984 Data Protection Act.
> "We had been informed by the Information Commissioner that the Data
> Protection Act does not allow retention of information purely for
employment
> vetting," he said.
> He said there were differing interpretations of what was required by
> different agencies.
> Mr Westwood said: "We face here the contradictory nature of two public
> policies.
> "First is the Data Protection Act which requires the removal of
information
> relating to individuals.
> "Secondly is the retaining of information to protect vulnerable people.
> "There is no national guidance on this. It is urgently needed."
> He told journalists he would support any change in the law to come from
the
> Soham case, and welcomed the inquiry announced by the home secretary
> following Wednesday's murder verdicts. "
>
> Given the seriousness of the issues raised by the case, clearly matters
need
> resolving by the proper authorities.
>
> How does DP determine the weeding criteria for personal data now?
>
> It used to be that the users/controllers debated the retention period and
> came to a consensus, based upon as firm a set of facts as possible, about
> the proper retention for the material in question, then, as determined by
> the data controller, either programatically or manually conducted the
> weeding. I had also been under the firm impression there were nationally
> agreed weeding rules for many police computing systems.
>
> Has this changed, or are different processes to determine retention now in
> operation?
>
> Ian W
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> All archives of messages are stored permanently and are
> available to the world wide web community at large at
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/data-protection.html
> If you wish to leave this list please send the command
> leave data-protection to [log in to unmask]
> All user commands can be found at : -
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/help/commandref.htm
> (all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> All archives of messages are stored permanently and are
> available to the world wide web community at large at
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/data-protection.html
> If you wish to leave this list please send the command
> leave data-protection to [log in to unmask]
> All user commands can be found at : -
> http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/help/commandref.htm
> (all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
All archives of messages are stored permanently and are
available to the world wide web community at large at
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/lists/data-protection.html
If you wish to leave this list please send the command
leave data-protection to [log in to unmask]
All user commands can be found at : -
http://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/help/commandref.htm
(all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|