Remove innocent people from the police DNA and fingerprint database

People are supposed to be innocent untill proven guilty therefore the police should not be allowed to hold onto peoples DNA and fingerprints unless they are proven guilty in a court of law. Perhaps it would be better if the police only took DNA and fingerprints of those charged rather than everybody arrested and quite oftern on faulse accusations.

Why is this idea important?

People are supposed to be innocent untill proven guilty therefore the police should not be allowed to hold onto peoples DNA and fingerprints unless they are proven guilty in a court of law. Perhaps it would be better if the police only took DNA and fingerprints of those charged rather than everybody arrested and quite oftern on faulse accusations.

Foreigners databasing information on Citizens.

Repeal all Laws allowing foreigners, or corporate entities from holding or databasing ANY information about Citizens. Any information gathered for legitimate reasons ( granting credit, monthly billings for goods / services etc ), must be held for processing in our country. data must not leave our country to be copied and processed outside our jurisdiction, and intercepted, seized, used against our citizens by foreign governments. No information should be shared with Foreign Police forces or others governments. no outside corporate entity should have the ABILITY to track our people's activities, and associates. ALL information gathered about a citizen MUST expire and be deleted no later than 18 months. And certified deleted, with massive penalties including prison for the directors and principals of the corporation, this includes for shoddy computer security as well. No algoriths may be applied against any data, to build PROFILES of citizzens or their likes dislikes, potential traits etc. NO Porfiling whatsoever.

Why is this idea important?

Repeal all Laws allowing foreigners, or corporate entities from holding or databasing ANY information about Citizens. Any information gathered for legitimate reasons ( granting credit, monthly billings for goods / services etc ), must be held for processing in our country. data must not leave our country to be copied and processed outside our jurisdiction, and intercepted, seized, used against our citizens by foreign governments. No information should be shared with Foreign Police forces or others governments. no outside corporate entity should have the ABILITY to track our people's activities, and associates. ALL information gathered about a citizen MUST expire and be deleted no later than 18 months. And certified deleted, with massive penalties including prison for the directors and principals of the corporation, this includes for shoddy computer security as well. No algoriths may be applied against any data, to build PROFILES of citizzens or their likes dislikes, potential traits etc. NO Porfiling whatsoever.

Data protection – outlaw the trading of personal data for gain

The sale of personal data has become commonplace in recent times and that data is being used (abused) by those who are buying and those who are selling. As a result, there is a swingeing increase in those who are greatly motivated by greed to exploit the fact that, inadvertently or otherwise, they are in possession of information that could be traded.

My name, my address and any other detail pertinent to me is pertinent to me alone. If that information is of any consequence to any other person – whether for profit or not – it is not to be traded under any circumstances.

One classic example of traded data relates to circumstances where a civil liability might be incurred, e.g. a motor accident. There is scarcely any physical damage to the vehicles involved and yet, 'claims farmers', unscrupulous solicitors, accident management companies, vehicle repairers, engineers or anybody involved in the process will have personal details of the parties involved in the accident; details which have a trading value to others who can exploit the civil litigation system – not in the name of justice and fair play but in the name of personal greed with little regard for the possible consequences of their activity. Watch TV during any advertisement break and bear witness to a myriad of traders (mostly illegitimate) who are seeking to make money from the 'victims' of the accident most of whom never suffered injury in the first instance but who are ready and willing to perjure themselves for the promise of a crock of gold.

Outlaw the trading of personal data and rid the country of a litigious nation whose primary motivation in life is "Something for nothing" 

Why is this idea important?

The sale of personal data has become commonplace in recent times and that data is being used (abused) by those who are buying and those who are selling. As a result, there is a swingeing increase in those who are greatly motivated by greed to exploit the fact that, inadvertently or otherwise, they are in possession of information that could be traded.

My name, my address and any other detail pertinent to me is pertinent to me alone. If that information is of any consequence to any other person – whether for profit or not – it is not to be traded under any circumstances.

One classic example of traded data relates to circumstances where a civil liability might be incurred, e.g. a motor accident. There is scarcely any physical damage to the vehicles involved and yet, 'claims farmers', unscrupulous solicitors, accident management companies, vehicle repairers, engineers or anybody involved in the process will have personal details of the parties involved in the accident; details which have a trading value to others who can exploit the civil litigation system – not in the name of justice and fair play but in the name of personal greed with little regard for the possible consequences of their activity. Watch TV during any advertisement break and bear witness to a myriad of traders (mostly illegitimate) who are seeking to make money from the 'victims' of the accident most of whom never suffered injury in the first instance but who are ready and willing to perjure themselves for the promise of a crock of gold.

Outlaw the trading of personal data and rid the country of a litigious nation whose primary motivation in life is "Something for nothing" 

Should all government data on citizens be controlled by independent trusts? And to whom would they be answerable?

Just wondering on this, but the more storage we get, inevitably the more data the government holds will increase. Computers were supposed to reduce paperwork, they increased it due to data.

The more data the government holds the more capacity, power and potential corruption therein they have to start abusing it. Should the control of what requests in their various contexts are acceptable and what not, lie with the system, or should it be independently controlled?

Trusts can be used to monitor which types of data requests are asked (by polticians, police, insurance companies), of whom and why. Police are already known to use anti terror requests to identify comparatively petty criminals, showing that (through the abuse of power) they can be no more trusted with data than said criminals.

As we have more data over time over more issues, I propose that the data is pulled away from the people that can unaccountably use that data to trusts that are accountable. Once appointed, they could appoint new members keeping themselves independent. But to whom should the trusts be accountable? The people via votes, other data trusts, or the politicians they are supposed to regulate?

Why is this idea important?

Just wondering on this, but the more storage we get, inevitably the more data the government holds will increase. Computers were supposed to reduce paperwork, they increased it due to data.

The more data the government holds the more capacity, power and potential corruption therein they have to start abusing it. Should the control of what requests in their various contexts are acceptable and what not, lie with the system, or should it be independently controlled?

Trusts can be used to monitor which types of data requests are asked (by polticians, police, insurance companies), of whom and why. Police are already known to use anti terror requests to identify comparatively petty criminals, showing that (through the abuse of power) they can be no more trusted with data than said criminals.

As we have more data over time over more issues, I propose that the data is pulled away from the people that can unaccountably use that data to trusts that are accountable. Once appointed, they could appoint new members keeping themselves independent. But to whom should the trusts be accountable? The people via votes, other data trusts, or the politicians they are supposed to regulate?

Scandalous

No one should be allowed to sell pass or give anyone's personal information to any other person, peoples, companies or any other bodies of any description. The clue is in the word PERSONAL.

Why is this idea important?

No one should be allowed to sell pass or give anyone's personal information to any other person, peoples, companies or any other bodies of any description. The clue is in the word PERSONAL.

Health care workers (Duty of Co-operation) Regulations 2010

Stop these unjust draft  regulations from ever coming into effect! 

They are discriminatory against anyone who works in front line health care (on the grounds of occupational status), by permitting legalised defamation of character and removing current protection afforded by the Data Protection Act. Under these regulations even unsubstantiated and malicious allegations must be kept on record long term- even indefinitely, and shared with other potential employers, professional bodies etc.

This is grossly unfair and potentially turns a vocation to care for others into a curse!

What hope for improved 'whistle-blowing' rights if highly dedicated professionals may be persecuted in this way by vindictive managers/ employers who are never held to account for the damage they  inflict upon standards of care?

Apparently these repugnant regulations are still under consultation on the Department of Health's website until July 9. For heaven's sake, why?

Katherine Guellard Registered Nurse

Why is this idea important?

Stop these unjust draft  regulations from ever coming into effect! 

They are discriminatory against anyone who works in front line health care (on the grounds of occupational status), by permitting legalised defamation of character and removing current protection afforded by the Data Protection Act. Under these regulations even unsubstantiated and malicious allegations must be kept on record long term- even indefinitely, and shared with other potential employers, professional bodies etc.

This is grossly unfair and potentially turns a vocation to care for others into a curse!

What hope for improved 'whistle-blowing' rights if highly dedicated professionals may be persecuted in this way by vindictive managers/ employers who are never held to account for the damage they  inflict upon standards of care?

Apparently these repugnant regulations are still under consultation on the Department of Health's website until July 9. For heaven's sake, why?

Katherine Guellard Registered Nurse

Define Data Protection

While I agree that I do not want my private data to get into the wrong hands the majority of institutions and organisations that I have had to converse with by phone seem to use this as an excuse for being totally unhelpful. It is terrible when you cannot help your teenage, young adult children to sort out a problem because someone will not speak to you. Also, I have been married for nearly 30 years and cannot get Utility companies to put Mr & Mrs on the bill and then if I have to ring they will not speak to Mrs because it is Mr on the account! Rediculous!

Why is this idea important?

While I agree that I do not want my private data to get into the wrong hands the majority of institutions and organisations that I have had to converse with by phone seem to use this as an excuse for being totally unhelpful. It is terrible when you cannot help your teenage, young adult children to sort out a problem because someone will not speak to you. Also, I have been married for nearly 30 years and cannot get Utility companies to put Mr & Mrs on the bill and then if I have to ring they will not speak to Mrs because it is Mr on the account! Rediculous!

The Protection of Data : Electoral Register / Roll

The Electoral Register / Roll should be completely and universally removed from access by any third party ( none government offices ) trying to acquire information of an individual for profit related reasons. ie, market research, private research, etc

Why is this idea important?

The Electoral Register / Roll should be completely and universally removed from access by any third party ( none government offices ) trying to acquire information of an individual for profit related reasons. ie, market research, private research, etc

Stop recording our emails and phone calls

One of the craziest ideas the Labour government brought in was a requirement for ISPs and telephone companies to keep records of all our phone calls and emails and for them to be available to the government. That law should be repealed. If security services need to listen in to terror suspects, then that should be authorised on a case by case basis with proper judicial process.

Why is this idea important?

One of the craziest ideas the Labour government brought in was a requirement for ISPs and telephone companies to keep records of all our phone calls and emails and for them to be available to the government. That law should be repealed. If security services need to listen in to terror suspects, then that should be authorised on a case by case basis with proper judicial process.

Recording emails, website visits and text

The last government wanted to record who we email, who we text, and what websites we use. It was intended that all this could be used for the prevention and detecting of serious crime.

Whilst it I think it is a good idea to know who is visiting sites that tell you how to build bombs etc, I feel that it is highly intrusive to record if we visited a site about things like aclohol problems, sites that help with male ompetence etc.

My idea is that the law should be changed to exclude websites and pone numbers that are set up to help people. This would mean that whilst the police could find out who called a suspected bomber a few times before an attack, the police would not be able to see if someone had accessed a web site that offers help or called Childline, crime stoppers etc. It would also mean that parents would know that calling someone for help with their alocohol problems etc would not be passed on to others, such as social services.

Why is this idea important?

The last government wanted to record who we email, who we text, and what websites we use. It was intended that all this could be used for the prevention and detecting of serious crime.

Whilst it I think it is a good idea to know who is visiting sites that tell you how to build bombs etc, I feel that it is highly intrusive to record if we visited a site about things like aclohol problems, sites that help with male ompetence etc.

My idea is that the law should be changed to exclude websites and pone numbers that are set up to help people. This would mean that whilst the police could find out who called a suspected bomber a few times before an attack, the police would not be able to see if someone had accessed a web site that offers help or called Childline, crime stoppers etc. It would also mean that parents would know that calling someone for help with their alocohol problems etc would not be passed on to others, such as social services.

Patients data and databases – there should be no surprises

Patients should be autonomous – have the freedom to control – the processing of their personal and clinical data/records.  They should also be kept fully informed as to the processing of their personal and medical data on a regular basis.

So BEFORE any personal or clinical data can be added to a database/register or other data storage system the patient should be asked to give informed consent.  If the patient refuses consent then the data should not be processed (that includes sharing, uploading, accessing and so on).  

There should not be any surprises for the patient regarding processing of their personal and clinical data.

Why is this idea important?

Patients should be autonomous – have the freedom to control – the processing of their personal and clinical data/records.  They should also be kept fully informed as to the processing of their personal and medical data on a regular basis.

So BEFORE any personal or clinical data can be added to a database/register or other data storage system the patient should be asked to give informed consent.  If the patient refuses consent then the data should not be processed (that includes sharing, uploading, accessing and so on).  

There should not be any surprises for the patient regarding processing of their personal and clinical data.

Scrap Copyright for personal/non-profit use

Be it Art, Music, Film, Software, reports.. it's all data in one way or another which whilst the creator should have a right to make money from it and control usage by business, all data should be free for personal use.

That doesn't mean eg.  you aren't allowed to put shareware restrictions on software but if you do get hold of a full version via P2P then it shouldn't be illegal.

If someone is profiting (eg. selling DVDs in the pub) then this should be punished harder

Why is this idea important?

Be it Art, Music, Film, Software, reports.. it's all data in one way or another which whilst the creator should have a right to make money from it and control usage by business, all data should be free for personal use.

That doesn't mean eg.  you aren't allowed to put shareware restrictions on software but if you do get hold of a full version via P2P then it shouldn't be illegal.

If someone is profiting (eg. selling DVDs in the pub) then this should be punished harder

Scrap Copyright for personal/non-profit use

Be it Art, Music, Film, Software, reports.. it's all data in one way or another which whilst the creator should have a right to make money from it and control usage by business, all data should be free for personal use.

That doesn't mean eg.  you aren't allowed to put shareware restrictions on software but if you do get hold of a full version via P2P then it shouldn't be illegal.

If someone is profiting (eg. selling DVDs in the pub) then this should be punished harder

Why is this idea important?

Be it Art, Music, Film, Software, reports.. it's all data in one way or another which whilst the creator should have a right to make money from it and control usage by business, all data should be free for personal use.

That doesn't mean eg.  you aren't allowed to put shareware restrictions on software but if you do get hold of a full version via P2P then it shouldn't be illegal.

If someone is profiting (eg. selling DVDs in the pub) then this should be punished harder

Stop using mobile phones as tracking devices

Mobile phone companies are required by law to track the location of every phone and store those location details for 12 months. This applies to everyone, no matter how innocent.

Mobile phone companies should be forbidden from retaining location data for any longer than is required to provide their services (minutes or hours), unless the customer has opted-in to longer retention, or where surveillance has been authorised by a court warrant.

Why is this idea important?

Mobile phone companies are required by law to track the location of every phone and store those location details for 12 months. This applies to everyone, no matter how innocent.

Mobile phone companies should be forbidden from retaining location data for any longer than is required to provide their services (minutes or hours), unless the customer has opted-in to longer retention, or where surveillance has been authorised by a court warrant.

Regulate ANPR and end general surveillance of all motorists

There are around 10,000 Automatic Number Plate Recognition cameras on British roads, they are run by ACPO, and a central database stores vehicles' movements for 2 years. No law governs their installation or use.

ANPR should be regulated. Mobile ANPR cameras should be permitted as part of police operations. Static cameras should normally not be permitted except where they serve a dual purpose (eg. London congestion charge cameras). Records on vehicles where there is no reasonable suspicion of crime should be deleted immediately (again unless there is a dual purpose, when data retention would not be by the police). ANPR for policing purposes should be operated by the police, or by some other body that is subject to proper oversight.

Why is this idea important?

There are around 10,000 Automatic Number Plate Recognition cameras on British roads, they are run by ACPO, and a central database stores vehicles' movements for 2 years. No law governs their installation or use.

ANPR should be regulated. Mobile ANPR cameras should be permitted as part of police operations. Static cameras should normally not be permitted except where they serve a dual purpose (eg. London congestion charge cameras). Records on vehicles where there is no reasonable suspicion of crime should be deleted immediately (again unless there is a dual purpose, when data retention would not be by the police). ANPR for policing purposes should be operated by the police, or by some other body that is subject to proper oversight.

Stop making private and personal details completely public

I typed my name into a search engine and one of the first results was a site on personal data, where it lists peoples addresses over the last 10 years, ages, directorships, phone numbers, people they have lived with etc. The electoral details can now be made private. The phone details can be ex directory. The directors details however are an anomoly and the age of the director is still readily available and renders the subject open to ID theft. My date of birth is private, I do not want it exposed online for all and sundry to see without restriction or audit. We are told not to reveal our private details on social networking sites, so why does Companies House insist on giving away the same details for others to publish online free of charge. I insist that my personal details be held at Companies House and are only available to anyone with a legitimate interest in credit checking – i.e. checking a Director’s credit should be subject to the same levels of security as checking a person’s personal credit via credit reference agencies. Insititutionalised ID theft risks are totally unacceptable.

Why is this idea important?

I typed my name into a search engine and one of the first results was a site on personal data, where it lists peoples addresses over the last 10 years, ages, directorships, phone numbers, people they have lived with etc. The electoral details can now be made private. The phone details can be ex directory. The directors details however are an anomoly and the age of the director is still readily available and renders the subject open to ID theft. My date of birth is private, I do not want it exposed online for all and sundry to see without restriction or audit. We are told not to reveal our private details on social networking sites, so why does Companies House insist on giving away the same details for others to publish online free of charge. I insist that my personal details be held at Companies House and are only available to anyone with a legitimate interest in credit checking – i.e. checking a Director’s credit should be subject to the same levels of security as checking a person’s personal credit via credit reference agencies. Insititutionalised ID theft risks are totally unacceptable.