Paul Ticher on Thursday, December 18, 2003 at 3:10 PM said:-

> What is 
> dangerous is an efficient information system with no system 
> of oversight, or with significant restrictions on subject access.

Quite. I was under the impression that police intelligence had a formulated
set of rules which had been agreed nationally, were fully compliant with DP
and police requirements, and were then implemented locally.  I suppose, with
relating to sensitive data, they were locked away, so only the appropriate
people had access to them; Exactly the type of situation which can often
lead to things being forgotten over time, and one DP practitioners sometimes
find frustrating.

Ian W

> -----Original Message-----
> From: This list is for those interested in Data Protection 
> issues [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of 
> Paul Ticher
> Sent: Thursday, December 18, 2003 3:10 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: DP weeding
> 
> 
> 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) 
> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
       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)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^