GDPR Consultation

[psydii]

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/data-a-new-direction

[Theblacksheep]

Attempt at trashing is full steam ahead.

[paulkerton]

Double edged sword this.

 

But ultimately, any way that can stop the weaponisation of SARs and FOI requests would be welcome. It's costing schools tens of thousands of pounds in some cases.

[DrCheese]

Agree - The GDPR is a great piece of law but yes, SARs & FOI requests are easily weaponised & it's making companies ultra paranoid about what they keep, to the detriment of the organisation. (eg ultra low retention policies)

[Theblacksheep]

SARs is covered, but there is far more on:

 

liberating GDPR restrictions for political campaigning including sensitive data

Freeing up GDPR for AI (give to Plantir)

Getting rid of mandatory data protection officers

Making grpr breaches voluntary

Relaxing the restrictions on data storage locations

transfer of powers to the secretary of state

widening the public interest definitions for AI and research

making it a duty for the ICO to take into account "economic growth" and "competition"

Government and parliament approval of ICO (like the Paul Dacre to Ofcom issue)

[Andrew_C]

Ribbit...

[Ditto]

I've not yet had a chance to review the consultation, but chatting to out DPO (outsourced) today, it was mentioned about changes around children aged 13 moving to aged 16. Anyone picked up on that yet?

[enjay]

Double edged sword this.

 

But ultimately, any way that can stop the weaponisation of SARs and FOI requests would be welcome. It's costing schools tens of thousands of pounds in some cases.

 

FOI requests can be refused if they're believed to be vexatious, so hopefully we'll see the same in SARs.

 

That, or something preventing people saying "give me absolutely everything you've got about me". I know one counter-argument to that is you might not want to alert the data controller as to why you're asking for the information, but I think that's more applicable to FOI than SAR.

[GrumbleDook]

I've not yet had a chance to review the consultation, but chatting to out DPO (outsourced) today, it was mentioned about changes around children aged 13 moving to aged 16. Anyone picked up on that yet?

 

Related to online harms? Still won’t make any difference to schools.

[Ditto]

Related to online harms? Still won’t make any difference to schools.

I thought it was more around consent for processing data. But, I also haven't read it yet, so must try to do so soon.

Edited October 23, 2021 by Ditto

[GrumbleDook]

I thought it was more around consent for processing data. But, I also haven't read it yet, so must try to do so soon.

 

Age for consent is to do with Internet Society Services, so that’s why I say it wouldn’t be relevant within schools.