The ICO published a further series of observations on the EU Commission’s data reform package on 22 January. The ‘further thoughts’ are said to be prompted by recent announcements from various bodies, of which the apparent hard line shown by the draft from the European Parliament and the apparent determination not to be diverted declared by the Commission may be the most significant. But so many bodies and organisations have commented on the data protection reform package that further thoughts may well be justified; it may also be that the recent report of the House of Commons Select Committee and the Government Response to it are relevant (Ed: for Uncle Tom Cobley’s observations, click here).
The latest ICO observations are to be found here.
Laurence Eastham comments:
Many of the thoughts echo the recent Government Response to the House of Commons Justice Committee but that had itself reflected the ICO’s initial concerns. Indeed, many of the further thoughts appear (on a first and hasty read at least) to be very similar to those earlier ICO observations. The reference to the need for ‘alternatives to consent’ where consent is not ‘viable’ and the view that the EU needs to be outward looking when considering data protection (presumably code for facilitating outsourcing) made a special impression on this reader. It is hard to see either thought going down well in Brussels however sensible.
Observations from more expert SCL members would be welcome.
