Jump to content
Coronavirus topics renamed and some locked. No new topics. ×
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man
Sign in to follow this  
Derek Flint

A shot across the bows. DHA Data Protection

Recommended Posts

On 6/27/2020 at 8:31 AM, Holte End said:

As a layman, do I understand this correctly.

A Government body has found another Government body guilty of breaking a Government regulation

The then said Government body imposes a fine on the other Government body,

Which will be paid from the Government to the Government.

No names, no accountability,no costs, no cares.

That's correct and it's why it will continue to happen again and again because nobody has really been held accountable.

Any consequence has ultimately been paid for by the taxpayer, as per usual.

This is why individual government employees, not just government bodies, should have fines or other sanctions imposed on them personally for misconduct.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember, we do not have misconduct in a public office on our statutes here.

an omission that is long overdue reform

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Derek Flint said:

Remember, we do not have misconduct in a public office on our statutes here.

an omission that is long overdue reform

No need in a well regulated jurisdiction.

  • Haha 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

More on this in BBC News online now (sorry, can't link). The information request came from an employee themselves, apparently for data held concerning themselves.

DHA "failed to comply with the fundamental right of access" and responded only in a "piecemeal" etc. fashion 5 months late (including three months after the complaint was actually lodged), states the Information Commissioner and imposes a £12,250 fine as an exemplary warning.

That the individuals concerned are probably still laughing about as they don't actually have to pay it themselves. 

Just how many civil servants do we continue to have who regard themselves as being above procedure and the law? And not just within DHA.

Edited by Non-Believer
Typo
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Non-Believer said:

More on this in BBC News online now (sorry, can't link). The information request came from an employee themselves, apparently for data held concerning themselves.

DHA "failed to comply with the fundamental right of access" and responded only in a "piecemeal" etc. fashion 5 months late (including three months after the complaint was actually lodged), states the Information Commissioner and imposes a £12,250 fine as an exemplary warning.

That the individuals concerned are probably still laughing about as they don't actually have to pay it themselves. 

Just how many civil servants do we continue to have who regard themselves as being above procedure and the law? And not just within DHA.

Ultimately it is the head of the department who is responsible for the efficiency of the department and its processes.

One would expect the CEO to be asked what is going on and why the department is defying the law.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Whatnonsence said:

Ultimately it is the head of the department who is responsible for the efficiency of the department and its processes.

One would expect the CEO to be asked what is going on and why the department is defying the law.

Because, as I’m sure happens with other departments also, the senior figures (including legal staff) believe that they can save pennies for the government, and in doing so, make themselves out to be heroes and so further line their own pockets. They suffer no personal or professional consequences for their negligent or illegal actions, despite causing untold misery and suffering for those people that they wilfully try and damage, by ignoring or trampling over legislation, regulations, case law precedent, legal and medical advice in some cases- all simply because there is nothing other than a slap in the wrist that occurs when individuals correctly challenge them. The rewards when their behaviour and actions go unchallenged are well worth it. The safety in numbers/herd mentality reigns supreme in the Government vs. an individual. Still, as I’ve said before, this won’t be the first or last time this particular department will be found guilty of breaking the law. I just hope one day their moral compass gets fixed, and a bit of care, integrity, respect and professionalism comes back into play, instead of forever chasing the pennies. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The BBC story is here - the BBC seems to have have been upping their output to a whole three stories a day recently, though in the grand traditions of Manx journalism, most of them seem to be cut down press releases.  In this case it was issued by the Information Commissioner on 25 June, so it only took them four days to react.  But the actual Penalty Notice was issued on 20 March, so it's not exactly up to date news.  Presumably the Commissioner was waiting for the time for any possible appeals to have lapsed before emphasising his point.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, manxst said:

Because, as I’m sure happens with other departments also, the senior figures (including legal staff) believe that they can save pennies for the government, and in doing so, make themselves out to be heroes and so further line their own pockets. They suffer no personal or professional consequences for their negligent or illegal actions, despite causing untold misery and suffering for those people that they wilfully try and damage, by ignoring or trampling over legislation, regulations, case law precedent, legal and medical advice in some cases- all simply because there is nothing other than a slap in the wrist that occurs when individuals correctly challenge them. The rewards when their behaviour and actions go unchallenged are well worth it. The safety in numbers/herd mentality reigns supreme in the Government vs. an individual. Still, as I’ve said before, this won’t be the first or last time this particular department will be found guilty of breaking the law. I just hope one day their moral compass gets fixed, and a bit of care, integrity, respect and professionalism comes back into play, instead of forever chasing the pennies. 

You sound like you have an axe to grind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

You sound like you have an axe to grind.

Or maybe just a case for them to answer. Along with quite a few others. At some point, the way they treat people, someone is going to have enough and hurt themselves through not being able to take any more personally directed illegal activity. We’ll see how big the fine will be then...

Edited by manxst
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/29/2020 at 6:43 AM, Derek Flint said:

Remember, we do not have misconduct in a public office on our statutes here.

an omission that is long overdue reform

The prison isn't big enough.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, manxst said:

Or maybe just a case for them to answer. Along with quite a few others. At some point, the way they treat people, someone is going to have enough and hurt themselves through not being able to take any more personally directed illegal activity. We’ll see how big the fine will be then...

I don't understand.   It was hardly crime of the century?  A (no doubt disgruntled) ex employee asked for information held on file and they dragged their heels?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

I don't understand.   It was hardly crime of the century?  A (no doubt disgruntled) ex employee asked for information held on file and they dragged their heels?

That’s merely one example of them riding roughshod over legislation to suit themselves. There are plenty more. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

I don't understand.   It was hardly crime of the century?  A (no doubt disgruntled) ex employee asked for information held on file and they dragged their heels?

It was enough of a crime to cost the taxpayer over £12k, regardless of whether it's a financial paper-shuffling exercise or not. Or whether it was a "disgruntled ex-employee".

It matters not who they were. They lodged a perfectly legitimate request in respect of the data held about them and the Department failed to comply with its legal obligations to supply. End of story.

They have no legal right to "drag their heels" at the taxpayer's expense. Everybody else ends up paying for this conduct however. Not those who transgressed legal requirement. As usual.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

You sound like you have an axe to grind.

I think we all have an axe to grind when people in public office are breaking the law.

Those who supervise or in charge should be brought to account.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...