« The Campaign for Freedom of Information: a call to alms | Main | Should national security certificates exclude the Data Protection Principles? »



Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

The Lindop Report also said that we should never have a Universal Personal Identifier since this breached privacy. Unfortunately nobody told the scientists this - which has led to DNA profiling and the fact that we all have a genetic 'universal personal identifer'. You cannot uninvent stuff, we have to learn to live with this and embrace the change.

In many ways the Lindop Report is a bit like the old Red Flag rule for motor cars - it is rooted in local history and pre-internet technologies which have been overtaken by events. In my view these latest changes are driven by commercial issues involving Big Data. It is natural for the police and security forces to look to find ways of commercialising their security data - since this should lead to cost savings and improved security for everyone. So I think the reason why this onward disclosure is allowed is to enable the security forces to make money and be less of a drain on the public purse.

Now purists may object to this but if the police and security services can make money from this data then the principle role of government, in protecting its citizens, is fulfilled at a lower cost.


The comments to this entry are closed.

All materials on this website are the copyright of Amberhawk Training Limited, except where otherwise stated. If you want to use the information on the blog, all we ask is that you do so in an attributable manner.