The ground is 100% effective against all known combat aircraft
|
|
|
NHS ignores data protection
DATA PRIVACY WATCHDOG the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) has warned that NHS health trusts do not seem to give a monkey's about losing data.
The ICO said it is concerned that data breaches involving people's personal information are continuing to occur in NHS organisations.
Yesterday it revealed that the NHS facility at Stoke-on-Trent and the Basingstoke and North Hampshire NHS Foundation Trust had broken the Data Protection Act (DPA).
More than 2,000 paper physiotherapy records were not filed within NHS Stoke-on-Trent's archive system and might have accidentally been destroyed or misfiled. At Basingstoke and North Hampshire NHS Trust an Excel spreadsheet containing 917 patients' pathology results was emailed via an unsecure address to another department.
The spreadsheet was not password protected and the receiving department had no business need to have access to the excessive number of clinical records.
Both NHS organisations' chief executives had to sign formal Undertakings outlining that they will process personal information in line with the DPA.
But the situation is much worse than it appears, according to the ICO. A quarter (250) of all data breaches reported to the ICO are from the NHS.
Mick Gorrill, head of enforcement at the ICO said, "Everyone makes mistakes, but regrettably there are far too many within the NHS. Health bodies must implement the appropriate procedures when storing and transferring patients' sensitive personal information."
He said that the ICO has taken a number of steps to explain the importance of personal data to NHS bodies and help them comply with the law, and promised that it will continue to do so. µ
Share this:
Share
Great comment by bigger luddite. As he says, often these days a name means it's opposite. What does it say about the times when our very governments are engaged in Orwellian doublespeak and deception?
Big deal, huh?
Well, yes, it is. You see, all our laws and constitutions are defined in words. When noone can agree what the words mean anymore - or people redefine them - the result is no law at all, IE anarchy.
Sound paranoid? Well, how about the US government not having to abide by the rules of the Geneva convention because "They're not POWS, they're battlefield detainees...."
How about every western government in the world (Yes, yours too) being not guilty of kidnapping free citizens because "We didn't kidap them - we were performing rendition..."
See the problem? Our laws are defined in words - yet any word's meaning is decided by us ....
Expect this to get worse... not sure what the solution is? A goverment mandated list of meanings of words? And that would be defined in words, of course ... circular problem... infinite regression ... Drashek, any ideas?
You in the UK have an entirely different definition of "trusts" than the US (where it means interlocking corporations that form a monopoly), and I think it here points up Orwellian double-think of a gov't agency that you *must* "trust" to look after your health, but can't actually "trust" to even maintain ordinary computer security. I rather doubt that the word "just happened" to be chosen, any more than our "Defense Department" engages in *less* war than before 1946 when it was the "War Department". Everywhere one turns these day, labels actually mean their opposite.