Jump to content


Your Nhs Records To Be Collected And Passed On-- Unless You Opt Out Now!

Recommended Posts

Your data is already being passed around to third parties as I demonstrated in an earlier post, giving the link to where NHS digital declares the different organisations that requested access to your medical records. It's been a thing since 2018.

 

I used to work in medical records as a student on a summer job back in the mid 1990s, when things were a mix of paper and electronic records. It was basically a building with a few offices in it and lots of lots of shelves full of folders of records, for the whole South East Hampshire area. It was about as secure as a bag of crisps; no signing into the building, no locked doors if the building was staffed, no security and on a warm day the loading bay was left open to get a breeze in. Records were checked in and out of the building to go to clinics and chucked in a box that sat on the loading bay until the van arrived at whatever random time it felt like. I'm far more confident in the security of my records now than I ever have been.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Thirsty Relic said:

The Government is not in charge of your health care.  The NHS are.  The HNS is funded by us all, through taxation.

 

At present, people tell their doctors things they would not tell their partners, workmates or their employers.  They do that for the good of their health, and that they know that it will remain confidential.  If that information is not going to be kept confidential, that trust is broken, and people will stop telling doctors of symptoms that they do not want insurance companies, their employers, and others to know about.  These could include symptoms of things like STD's, HIV/AIDs, the early stages of major illnesses, diseases they could pass on to the rest of us. 

 

I'd like to think I'm able to tell my Doctor about anything affecting me.  I would certainly think twice if it meant he'd just pass it on to whoever wanted to collect it from the NHS.

,

 

Those days are over, pal

 

You can't keep a potential communicable disease secret and blithely go about your business any more. School teacher? Restaurant chef?

 

With the new contact tracing they can even find out even if you ever met one, for a beer.

 

Governments are more than ever centralizing, consolidating and sharing information between branches.

 

All in the interests of "public health" and whatever else they might deem to be the good of the State.

 

Socialism  doesn't work well, without enforced compliance, then it is called communism.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, trastrick said:

Those days are over, pal

 

You can't keep a potential communicable disease secret and blithely go about your business any more. School teacher? Restaurant chef?

 

With the new contact tracing they can even find out even if you ever met one, for a beer.

 

Governments are more than ever centralizing, consolidating and sharing information between branches.

 

All in the interests of "public health" and whatever else they might deem to be the good of the State.

 

Socialism  doesn't work well, without enforced compliance, then it is called communism.

 

First time I've heard a Tory government called socialist or communist apart from by the odd nazi 😎

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
17 hours ago, Longcol said:

First time I've heard a Tory government called socialist or communist apart from by the odd nazi 😎

What's in a name?

 

A "Tory" government running a Welfare State?

 

Ever hear of National Socialists?  Better known as NAZIS?

 

Or Democratic People's Republic of Korea. Better known as North Korean Communist Dictatorship?

 

Or Democratic Republic of the Congo. Formerly Belgian Congo, Zaire, who's first elected Prime Minister, Patrice Lumumba  was shot by a firing squad?

 

Names can be misleading. Don't be fooled.

 

And I can assure you that this poster was never a National Socialist, nor even a Democratic Socialist supporter, Lol

 

But back on topic.

 

The average citizen should have no fear of his government "private" records being hacked or leaked, unless he is an opposition politician running in an election, a captain of Industry, or a celeb critical of the government of the day.

 

(or hopes to become one)
 

Edited by trastrick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 03/06/2021 at 10:12, trastrick said:

In practice most folks with a complaint, will just grumble and let it go. rather than lawyer up and "sue" the government.
 
How long would it take to adjudicate such a suit, months, years?

 

In a welfare state, where taxpayer money is being doled out, there should be no expectation of "privacy", by its recipients.

In practice most people  with a complaint would use or be directed to use the ICO which is "... equipped for single customer complaints...". This is common knowledge for people working with data in any business or organization, including Medical Practices and Schools as it is a training requirement of employees who have access to data to have training.

 

The ICO will take action if there has been a breech. They have a range of sanctions.

An individual can use the ICO report if they are claiming  compensation for harm or damages.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
14 hours ago, Annie Bynnol said:

In practice most people  with a complaint would use or be directed to use the ICO which is "... equipped for single customer complaints...". This is common knowledge for people working with data in any business or organization, including Medical Practices and Schools as it is a training requirement of employees who have access to data to have training.

 

The ICO will take action if there has been a breech. They have a range of sanctions.

An individual can use the ICO report if they are claiming  compensation for harm or damages.

 

 

The ICO is appointed by the Crown.

 

It is just another layer of government bureaucracy, directed mainly at the private sector. It is funded by the government and mandatory fees assessed against private organizations that hold citizen's personal data. They also have the power to fine private organizations for breaches of confidentially,  which is another major source of their funding.

 

According to their web site, and WIKI, their recent investigations and successful prosecutions have been against private orgs. :  "the ICO has undertaken high-profile investigations into Equifax, Yahoo, Talk Talk, Uber, and Facebook; issuing the maximum fine under the Data Protection Act 1998 of £500,000 to Facebook,[2] for breaches of data protection law. (and) also overseen the conclusion of the ICO's investigation into charities' fundraising activities and a series of fines for companies behind nuisance marketing.[3]" -WIKI

 

ICO does not have any statutory power to charge fees, or assess fines to the government which appoints it. There, it is limited to "raising concerns". lol

 

"UK government departments experienced "thousands" of data breaches between 2019 and 2020, raising concerns about the quality of security implemented by the institutions.

 

According to annual reports, as well as Freedom of Information (FOI) requests made by USB drive manufacturer Apricorn, 17 government departments experienced thousands of personal breaches between them during the 12-month period and made numerous notifications to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO)"  - ITPro. 

 

So this still begs the question:

 

How safe are your GOVERNMENT records?
 

Edited by trastrick

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

4 hours ago, trastrick said:

The ICO is appointed by the Crown.

 

It is just another layer of government bureaucracy, directed mainly at the private sector. It is funded by the government and mandatory fees assessed against private organizations that hold citizen's personal data. They also have the power to fine private organizations for breaches of confidentially,  which is another major source of their funding.

 

According to their web site, and WIKI, their recent investigations and successful prosecutions have been against private orgs. :  "the ICO has undertaken high-profile investigations into Equifax, Yahoo, Talk Talk, Uber, and Facebook; issuing the maximum fine under the Data Protection Act 1998 of £500,000 to Facebook,[2] for breaches of data protection law. (and) also overseen the conclusion of the ICO's investigation into charities' fundraising activities and a series of fines for companies behind nuisance marketing.[3]" -WIKI

 

ICO does not have any statutory power to charge fees, or assess fines to the government which appoints it. There, it is limited to "raising concerns". lol

 

"UK government departments experienced "thousands" of data breaches between 2019 and 2020, raising concerns about the quality of security implemented by the institutions.

 

According to annual reports, as well as Freedom of Information (FOI) requests made by USB drive manufacturer Apricorn, 17 government departments experienced thousands of personal breaches between them during the 12-month period and made numerous notifications to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO)"  - ITPro. 

 

So this still begs the question:

 

How safe are your GOVERNMENT records?
 

When you had a problem with an alleged data breach at your surgery you were wrong in your assumption that the ICO is not for individuals.

 

Your personal viewpoint on the effectiveness and independence of the ICO could equally apply to the judiciary and ombudsman services.

 

On Thursday "The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has fined the Conservative Party £10,000 for sending 51 marketing emails to people who did not want to receive them." regarding e-mails from Boris Johnson

 

In the past very little was safe.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Annie Bynnol said:

 

When you had a problem with an alleged data breach at your surgery you were wrong in your assumption that the ICO is not for individuals.

 

Your personal viewpoint on the effectiveness and independence of the ICO could equally apply to the judiciary and ombudsman services.

 

On Thursday "The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) has fined the Conservative Party £10,000 for sending 51 marketing emails to people who did not want to receive them." regarding e-mails from Boris Johnson

 

In the past very little was safe.

 

 

 

 

My surgery?

 

Your ICO's relentless campaign to reduce political junk mail is noted!

 

It's an onerous task to investigate millions of political emails and follow up on 51 "unwanted" emails, and the 95 complaints, out of the more than 23,000,000 campaign emails sent out by one political party.

 

Likewise, political parties are just not equipped to predetermine who may not wish to receive their campaign messages, so they use a "sledgehammer" approach.

 

But they all do it.

 

See:

The Guardian, Tue 21 Jul 2015

"Why British political parties won’t stop spamming you"

 

"Still, Labour’s approach comes in for withering criticism from their opponents – for the sheer volume of emails, and the indiscriminate nature of what they say to supporters. During the election campaign, Labour ran a number of viral campaigns that were partly designed as means of harvesting email contacts: one told you “what number baby born on the NHS” you are, another how many people on the electoral roll share your name. Neither particularly suggested a deep connection with the party on the part of those who signed up, but the result was a torrent of messages from Ed Miliband and pals.

“They knew nothing about you except that you’re an email address,” says Rathe. “And they just throw everything at you. It’s a sledgehammer approach."

 

Didn't see ICO get involved during that campaign. Lol

 

But more to the point, perhaps the government should focus on preventing its own "thousands of data breaches between 2019 and 2020, from its own 17 government departments"?

 

That is a far greater danger to citizens privacy rights, than unwanted spam from political campaigns.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 25/05/2021 at 07:26, Mr Allen said:

The first link is the Daily Fail, total bobbins! :loopy: 

 

Perhaps you'd like to show the later retraction, then?

 

Oh.

You can't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.