The previous post and article referred to a concern from a focused
perspective and cannot be taken as totally incorrect, merely not giving the
broader picture. I would guess the statement is focused for a particular
audience and worded for their needs and objectives.
The original Lindop report:
Lindop, Norman Sir. Report of the Committee on Data Protection. London:
HMSO, 1978. ISBN 0 10 173410 7
and the follow on report from the core committee which was reconvened in
1981 would be some things to read if one wished to begin identifying some of
the later origins of the DPA 1984, and apparent frustrations surrounding the
original implementation.
A previously circulated message on this list on 25 June 2004 relating to the
Bichard Report identifies that some unpublished papers also exist from
during that period which identify one of the main bones of contention over
the DPA 1984 as being that the Home Office did not want an independent
supervisory authority, as they preferred to carry out that function
themselves. Today it could almost appear as if they have been progressing
towards that same preference ever since.
Regards
Ian W
Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2007 21:56:49 -0000
From: Paul Ticher <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: Deceased Records Access - Was Silent Calls
In her introduction to a booklet introducing the 1998 Act, Elizabeth France
says:
"The Data Protection Act 1984 grew out of public concern about personal
privacy in the fact of rapidly developing computer technology."
This repeats the introduction to an earlier leaflet about the 1984 Act,
which goes on to say:
"The Act also enabled the UK to ratify the council of Europe Convention on
Data Protection allowing data to flow freely between the UK and other
European countries with similar laws, preventing damage to the economy and
international trade which might otherwise have occurred."
(Now I know why I kept a file called "1984 Data Protection Act" - so that I
can answer questions like this!)
My memory is a bit hazy - and it was over 20 years ago - but my recollection
is that it was actually the second of these that carried more weight. I
think the Act was a fairly cynical attempt to do the minimum necessary to
ratify the convention, for purely economic reasons, with only a nod towards
protecting the individual. I am pretty sure it had nothing whatsoever to do
with stopping junk mail, let alone addressed to dead people. The Mailing
Preference Service came into being around the same time; maybe the two are
being confused?
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.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
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 messages please send to the list owner
[log in to unmask]
Full help Desk - please email [log in to unmask] describing your needs
To receive these emails in HTML format send the command:
SET data-protection HTML to [log in to unmask]
(all commands go to [log in to unmask] not the list please)
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|