OMG
I declare
Privacy issues
Everywhere
Earlier today, I joined the throng of data protectors
clamouring for a good seat in Westminster’s Central Hall, where a healthy
smattering of the usual suspects had assembled for the launch of the ICO’s
latest annual report.
For some of us, it was to be the second time we had heard
Christopher Graham today. The first time was before breakfast, live on Radio
4’s “Today” programme, where he was asked to comment on whether ‘data
protection’ prevented the Quality Care Commission from naming senior managers
apparently involved in a decision to destroy a QCC report criticising its inspections of University Hospitals of
Morecambe Bay NHS Foundation Trust, where a number of mothers and babies died.
No it doesn’t, in case you didn’t already know. And last
night, just before bedtime, Jeremy Paxman had been praising his wise pronouncements on the same issue
on BBC2’s “Newsnight” programme.
Now, he was with us
in person, complete with a whizzy Prezi presentation that really puts my trusted Power
Point slides in their place. No lights,
smoke, mirrors or a platform. Just an hour of explanations about how his office
enforces, educates, empowers, enables, encourages, and is both effective and
efficient . Yes, this was an “E-Annual report”. Parliament got the only
printed copy. The rest of us will
henceforth rely on the electronic version (or a pdf document which is available
from the ICO’s website).
What did we hear
that was new?
“We are not an
arm of Government” quoth the Commissioner.
“But you are an
arm of the state” mumbled a member of the awkward squad, seated nearby.
“Local government
is making a pig's ear of data protection at the moment” quoth the Commissioner. (Presumably he was referring
to the amount of enforcement action that had been taken against wayward local authorities, but no-one asked him just what he meant.)
“2013 will be the
year that organisations realise the commercial imperative of handling customer
data properly” quoth the Commissioner. Well, let’s hope so.
Private discussions
among many guests before and after the main event focused on the prospects of a
Regulation being agreed by the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers
by this time next year. According to my (occasionally reliable) source, it seems that a
deal is being hatched that might just about get agreed by our political masters.
But, if the European Commission really is determined to get a Regulation next
year, then it is likely that the only Regulation that could be agreed would be
a simple instrument that introduces a European Data Protection Board, to better
co-ordinate the work currently carried out by the Article 29 Working Party.
Everything else (which means all the contentious stuff) will need to be put off
for another time.
So, If European Commissioner
Reding wants to stand on some podium next year, as she did last January when
launching the document containing that bunch of words cobbled together to form
the text of the draft Regulation, to proclaim once again “Ladies and Gentlemen,
we have done it,” then the only thing that might have got done is the thing
that many of us didn’t express much of an opinion on, anyway.
Over lunch, another
commentator mused on the way the data protection community was poised to shoot
itself in the foot. Here is a great example of a wide range of people who
essentially want to do good, but being incapable of agreeing what “good”
actually meant, they sadly explained.
As far as I’m
concerned, the near hysterical atmosphere in which “negotiations” are currently
being carried out, with some stakeholders
playing to the gallery rather than intent on reaching a deal, really makes me
wonder how differently a new round of discussions will need to be managed for
there to be any chance of success next time, either.
Perhaps new faces
are required at the negotiating tables.
Perhaps, too, I
had better start crafting a lament about the demise of an unloved, fussy colleague.
I’ll call him
Reg.
Sources:
.
Posts
