I happen to just be browsing the Official Statistics section of my RSS News
June 2006 (Royal Statistical Society).
It reports under the heading "Citizen Information Project"
"The government announced on 18 April that it had accepted the
recommendation of the Citizen Information Project, which had been previously
reported in this column. These were that:
*there is significant value to both citizens and the public sector in
greater sharing of contact details in a secure way across the public sector
*this should be implemented through the identity cards scheme on the basis
that the scheme eventually becomes compulsory. The Identity and Passport
should be responsible for developing the National Identity Register as an
adult population database
...
The government statement is available on the Parliament website
www.parliament.uk, then follow links to Hansard/Daily Debates for 18
April/Written Ministerial Statements. Details of the Citizen Information
Project itself are on its website (www.gro.gov.uk/cip/)."
I quote (their Copyright) from www.gro.gov.uk/cip:
"Better sharing of citizen contact information accross the public sector
The Citizen Information Project (CIP) evaluated how public money could be
saved, and services to citizens improved, by increasing the sharing of basic
citizen information (contact details such as name, address and date of
birth) across central and local Government. Although some parts of the
public sector are rationalising the information they hold, there are still
many systems attempting to maintain local citizen contact details. We have
been able to identify at least five sets of contact details held separately
for every single person in the UK.
Around half of UK citizens move house within seven years, and some more
frequently. Sharing latest contact information about an increasingly mobile
population across the public sector increases the chance of keeping up with
these changes and therefore successfully contacting citizens. This would
benefit many public services.
The project was led by the UK government’s Office for National Statistics
(ONS), with close involvement of Her Majesty’s Treasury (HMT), the Home
Office Identity Cards Programme, other government departments and other
stakeholders.
The project consisted of two phases. A feasibility study was completed in
2003, and a 'Project Definition' phase with final recommendations in 2005.
Documents from the two phases can be downloaded on the following pages.
The key documents are 2005 Project Definition report and the 2006
Ministerial statement.
The CIP project is now closed, and its recommendations are being taken
forward by other government departments. The National Identity Register
proposed as part of the Home Office Identity Cards Programme will, subject
to legislation, deliver many of the CIP benefits in the longer term by
effectively acting as the UK adult population register."
Nick Landau
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lawrence Serewicz" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2006 3:48 PM
Subject: Re: [data-protection] Information Disclosure to Assessors (ERO)
> The ERO has the power to inspect to fulfill their duty. Yes, they have a
> wide ranging power on a very narrow topic.
>
> Here is the url for the upload from the ICO
> http://www.ico.gov.uk/documentUploads/The%20Right%20to%20Inspect%20Local%20Authority%20Records.pdf
>
>
> As to the Council tax, it can be used for a variety of secondary uses, but
> these are circumscribed by law. For example, and authority can use CT to
> track down its debtors. However, a council cannot use the CT for a
> general information source. The address change would occur when the
> person writes in or contacts the authority. If this requires going
> through CT, then it would not be allowed.
>
> Joined up government is stymied if it has to go through CT, although the
> ICO has said that it might not be too bothered about pursuing this unless
> there are complaints. I cannot find the upload on the ICO page, but I
> have a pdf that I downloaded from their site that covers this issue.
>
> Here is the material cut from the pdf document
>
> Legal Advice given to the Commissioner
> 5. The advice given to the Commissioner is as follows: •
>
> Local authorities are creatures of statute and, as such, must have
> specific statutory authority to use or disclose information acquired by
> virtue of their powers to charge and administer Council Taxes for any
> purpose.
>
> The scheme under which Council Tax is administered is set out in the LGFA
> and the Council Tax (Administration and Enforcement) Regulations 19921
> (“the Regulations”).
>
> A Billing Authority (i.e. local authority) may make use of other
> information in its possession, except that held in its capacity as a
> police authority, together with information supplied by listing officers,
> precepting authorities, CCROs, EROs, the Commissioner of Births Deaths and
> Marriages, or the Commissioner General for England and Wales, and other
> authorities, for Council Tax purposes. However, any (page break)
>
> FN (Council Tax: secondary use of personal information held for the
> collection and administration 1 SI 1992 No 613
> August 2004)
>
> p. 1
>
> continued:
> information so obtained may only be used or disclosed for Council Tax
> purposes, unless specific statutory authority exists that allows secondary
> disclosure or purposes. •
>
> There is no power in the LGFA or the Regulations to make disclosures of
> personal data held for Council Tax purposes for other purposes. Paragraph
> 17 of schedule 2 of the LGFA allows for regulations to be made for the
> supply of relevant information to any person who requests it for another
> purpose, but personal data is specifically excluded.
>
> 6. Since no other uses and disclosures are permitted, the processing of
> personal data for any such other purposes (or to effect other disclosures)
> would thus be ultra vires.
>
> 7. The Commissioner also received advice regarding the application of
> Section 111 of the Local Government Act 1972 to possible uses of data held
> for Council Tax purposes. This provides that: “a local authority shall
> have power to do any thing ... which is calculated to facilitate, or is
> conducive or incidental to, the discharge of any of their functions.”
>
> 8. It has been suggested that this provision would sanction the use of
> data held for Council Tax purposes for some secondary purposes,
> notwithstanding the fact that the LGFA and the Regulations are silent on
> the matter. The Commissioner is advised, however, that this is an
> incorrect interpretation and that this Section does not allow the exercise
> of powers derived from one statute for another statutory function. In
> particular it would not allow personal data held for Council Tax purposes
> to be used as a resource for other local authority purposes, even given
> the consent of the Council Tax payer.
>
> 9. Section 111 may, however, allow billing authorities, when advising
> Council Tax payers of how the local authority’s budget has been allocated,
> to promote other Council services and to inform them of benefits and other
> schemes of which they may wish to take advantage.
>
> 10. In summary, the Commissioner’s response to enquiries about possible
> secondary uses of Council Tax data is that the only permitted uses and
> disclosures of data are those specified in the LGFA or the Regulations, or
> in other statutes regulating different Local Authority functions. Lawful
> Processing of Personal Data
>
> 11. The first data protection principle2 requires that: Personal data
> shall be processed fairly and lawfully ...
>
> 12. Supported by the Data Protection Tribunal, the Commissioner has taken
> the view that the lawful processing element of this principle will be
> breached if there is no lawful basis for the processing of personal data
> or if the effect any processing is to breach a legal obligation3. For
> public bodies such as local authorities a key question in considering
> compliance with the principle is whether or not they have the power, or
> vires, to carry out processing. Any processing which is itself ultra
> vires, or is carried out for a purpose which is (page break)
>
> Footnote (2 Paragraph 1 of Part I of Schedule 1 to the Data Protection Act
> 1998
>
> 3 For a full account of the Commissioner’s position, you should read
> “Private Lives and Public Powers” published by the Commissioner in 1997.
> August 2004)
>
> page 2
>
> continued:
> itself ultra vires, will necessarily breach the first data protection
> principle by virtue of the fact that it is unlawful. The Commissioner’s
> Enforcement Policy
>
> 13. Breaches of the data protection principles are not criminal offences.
> However, where he considers that there has been a contravention of one or
> more of the principles the Commissioner does have the power to serve
> enforcement notices specifying steps to be taken to rectify the effect of
> the contravention and to prevent further contraventions taking place.
>
> 14. Before taking enforcement action the Commissioner must consider all
> the relevant circumstances, which would include any consent given by the
> Council Tax payer to a secondary use of the data and whether there had
> been any damage or distress caused to data subjects. The Commissioner is
> not aware of any allegations of widespread or significant areas of
> complaint about, or abuses of, Council Tax data by local authorities. In
> view of that, he does not intend to follow this advice by a compliance
> investigation of authorities’ uses of Council Tax data. However this does
> not mean that he will not take enforcement action in this area, for
> example following a complaint from a data subject4.
>
> Conclusion
>
> 15. The Commissioner recognises that the restrictive nature of the advice
> which he has received and of the difficulties which this may cause
> Councils. The Commissioner also recognises that the effect of this advice
> may run counter to the encouragement given to public bodies in the
> Modernising Government White Paper to share and make more effective use of
> information which they hold. He does, however, draw attention to the
> commitment in the White Paper to: “provide a proper and lawful basis for
> data sharing where this is desirable, for example in the interest of
> improved service or fraud reduction consistent with our commitment to
> protect privacy.”
>
> 16. The Commissioner would therefore advise local authorities which wish
> to use personal data held for Council Tax purposes for a secondary purpose
> to make their representations for a change in the law to the government
> through the usual channels.
>
> 17. While the Commissioner’s compliance staff will attempt to answer any
> practical questions which arise from this advice and which are not covered
> by the Annex, they will be unable to enter into more general discussion
> concerning the legal opinion received by the Commissioner which forms the
> basis of this advice. If authorities wish to make further legal points or
> raise other points for consideration, they are asked to do so in writing
> to the Commissioner’s Legal Department. (page break)
>
> Footnote 4 The Commissioner’s enforcement policy is set out in an
> Enforcement Statement which is available on the Information Commissioner’s
> web site
>
> August 2004
>
> page 3
>
>
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> Lawrence
>
>
> Lawrence W. Serewicz
> Scrutiny Manager
> Management Support Unit
> Wear Valley District Council
> 01388-761-985
>
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
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
Any queries about sending or receiving message please send to the list owner
[log in to unmask]
(all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
