November 2009 Archives

I read the Guardian article "Police routinely arresting people to get DNA" after it was drawn to my attention by FIPR and came to the opposite conclusion. The "real" issue is that Parliament has not debated the issue and no-one has consulted the public. I am one of those who would like my DNA on file in case I my identity credentials are lost, stolen or otherwise compromised as a result of poor information governance. But I have no more choice than the members of the posses haunting the unpoliced high streets which I go on-line to avoid.  

There has been much debate on "The Value of Information" and on responsibilities for protecting personal data. Last week the Audit Commission released a report on the need to address the problems of quality in public sector information: "Nothing but the Truth". Today the Information Society Alliance (EURIM) released a one page summary for political audiences on the need to treat information as an asset in order to prevent it from turning into a liability.

We have a very muddled and muddied set of debates over privacy, security and data sharing. It can be summarised as  "I want more efficient joined up services from government but I don't want my information used by bureaucratic snoopers". Meanwhile the latest jobsworth excuse for poor or non-existent service is "Sorry can't do that because of Data Protection".

Over the past year the Information Society Alliance (EURIM) has been trying to structure a group to look at Identity Governance: the professional and regulatory frameworks that should govern Identity Management systems and those who run them.