Would  group members like to comment and inform me if they agree or disagree
with my arguements below  or whether I have missed vital information from
other legislation. I just feel that I am probably wrong but cannot think of
exactly why, maybe I have delevoped the" data protection blindness"  in that
all I ever see is problems and not the common sense solutions.     PS  the
document is reasonably lengthy.  

Data Protection Advice Query for Electoral Returning Officer.


The Representation of the Peoples Act states that every candidate in an
election is entitled to  a copy of the relevant parts of the Electoral Roll
for that election.

This information is provided for the purpose of "Canvassing Political
Support Amongst the Electorate".

There is no data protection issue in providing this information, being
statute driven. 

The Election Candidate having accepted the list of information is now a Data
Controller in the terms of the Data Protection Act 1998 simply by the fact
that he is holding a paper list of that part of the Electoral roll. ( The
candidate is now controlling how( ie the manner) and for what purposes that
information is used).  The expectation has to be that it will be used for
what is was provided for.

Question ??   Should there be a clause restricting what purposes the
candidates can use the information for?
Question??   Should this clause be a condition the candidate agrees to
before being accepted as a candidate in the election??

The traditional view is that the candidate will now use that list to conduct
their campaign by visiting some of the constituents. This is usually
organised from the paper copy.
The campaign may consist of   personal visits , addressed correspondence
mailshots etc..

Provided the information is not input into any "means of automatic
processing"  there is no compulsion on the candidate to "Notify" for the
processing ( holding) with the Data Protection Commissioner.

However, the Data Protection Act still requires the Candidate to comply with
the Eight Principles.
Failure to do so is a criminal offence.

The candidate , or his helpers, in a traditional view of canvassing will
visit constituents and solicit their support in the election.  This support
(or not)  is usually recorded on a list of names and addresses or directly
on a copied version of the Electoral roll. 

What has been recorded is the  political voting intention of that
constituent. I consider this information ie which way you are going to vote
to be Sensitive Personal data as defined in Section 2(b) of the 98 Act.

As sensitive personal data at least one criteria of schedule 2 and one of
schedule 3 must apply for the processing to be lawful.
Schedule 2.
I would infer that clause 6 or 5(a) could be cited as the criteria.  Clause
1 would be better but I guess that not all constituents would provide that
consent as their names have been added to the electoral roll under threat of
a large fine if they do not.
Schedule 3.
I am finding it difficult to find a relevant clause for schedule 3 other
than clause 1 l( data subject consent).  My examination of the other clauses
of schedule 3 conclude with these thoughts....
Clause 2.... Does the Representaion of the Peoples Act confer a right for
candidates to record sensitive personal data?  I do not consider it so... it
confers the right for them  to know which people will be included in the
poll.
Clause 3.... Vital interests of the data subject..... an election vote could
hardly be described as that...there may be compulsion for people to register
but the compulsion does extend to having to vote.
Clause 4.... My understanding  is that at an election the voters are
electing an individual ( ie one of the candidates)  their vote is not for
the Political party.  In any case if that were so ,what would the position
be for the Independent  Candidate that had no party machine behind them.
Don't forget clause 4 pararaphs (a) to (d) all have to be met  ie they are
ANDED not Ored.
Clause 5.... Being made public by deliberate steps.... Would not apply.  One
or two constituents might but not the entire electoral roll.
Clause 6   legal proceedings....does not apply.
Clause 7    Necessary  function..... does not apply.
Clause 8... medical purpose......does not apply.
Clause 9.... Monitoring of equality.... Does not apply.
Clause 10     Order of the Secretary of State..... I know of none.

So after considering all of this ,  if  voting intentions are to be recorded
the only clause that would  legitimise that processing in my view is
obtaining the data subject's consent......informed positive consent.

In conclusion,  I am brought to the view that to comply strictly with good
practice as expounded by the Act and as  no candidate would wish to have
their use of the electoral roll challenged during a election period  ,
therefore they all must....
1	be registered for Canvassing of Political Support amongst the
Electorate
2	obtain the informed positive consent of the data subject before
recording any political view, opinion or intention on the electoral roll or
any other referenced list.

For  the Returning Officer, provided my argument is correct, these concerns
arise...
1	What advice should be given when an application to be a candidate in
an election is received?
2	Should the Returning Officers actually check that any candidate is
Registered before disclosing/releasing  personal data to be used in an
illegal processing of information?
		OR  does the Representation of the Peoples Act  provide the
basis for election candidates to completely ignore the data rights of
individuals ( Human Rights ) and for Returning Officers to issue personal
data in circumstances where they know the data protection laws will be
broken.

Finally  consider the chaos and confusion amongst the electorate if claims
and counter claims of mal practice are bandied around during the next
election. The Dobson fiasco did nothing to enhance the reputationof our
electioneering process.

The requirement for Candidates to hold a data protection notification is
evident if the information is input to a computer and further processed to
aid the canvassing and to record those constituents a candidate has
identified that would maximise their vote if mobilised to the poll.  (The
basis of the process as I understand it.)

I am aware this all sounds rather silly and the our national Election
process shouldn't be placed in this type of embarrassing position where the
legislation surrounding can be interpreted to make all candidates, using
what I understand to be the age old  standard practices, to be potentially
committing criminal offences.


I hope you are able to point out where my facts or logic are not correct.

Roger Glover.
24 /May 2000
Election-candidates.doc



The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged.
It is intended solely for the addressee.  Unless expressly authorised in
writing, disclosure, copying, distribution and retention, in part or in
whole, of this email is prohibited and may be unlawful.

Wokingham District Council cannot guarantee that any files attached to this
e-mail are free from viruses or any other program code that may be harmful
to your computer, and, as such, is not liable for any damage that may be
caused as a result.

Please delete this e-mail if it is not intended for you.



%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%