Eye Tea

Okay, let’s be polemical.

Data protection in the UK is benign. For the average organisation that gets routine compliance wrong but doesn’t mean to, you don’t get into trouble as such.  You get told how to comply, and as long as you do as you’re told there’s no talk of criminal offences. You could almost make it your compliance strategy to wait for customers to complain then let the regulator tell you what to do.  Customers have the right to compensation in some cases, but it’s small stuff and rarely goes to court. You can get named and shamed on the regulator’s website, but so what? It’s a rare case that causes major reputational damage and makes the national news headlines, and you can ride out stories in local news and sector/ trade publications.

The thing is, you pretty much can run your compliance strategy like that, and I think many organisations do.  I don’t imagine that it’s driven by cynicism.  It’s just what it ends up looking like if you don’t put enough resources into data protection compliance.  And with plenty of other calls on your cash and time, why would you ?

I think there’s quite a good business case for good data protection compliance, although I’ll write about that another time.  What interests me today is why DP compliance gets neglected.

My guess is, not many people know how to do compliance simply and cost-effectively, without making a business out of it.  The law and regulators’ guidance are pretty complicated.  They offer high level principles and really specific guidance and case studies, and not much in between.  You could be forgiven for not even bothering to make a start, let alone boil it all down into a simple, effective system.  I like the BSI’s new standard on data protection but I think it’s complicated and can’t yet be certified.  Ditto the information governance standards.  So far as I can tell the regulator hasn’t issued similar standards guidance, which I find a bit surprising.  Which leaves us all … not doing too well at DP compliance.

What’s prompted me to think about this is news this week about new powers for the regulator.  (See the “News” links, below.)  I need to spend time getting to grips with guidance on the new powers, and I’ll be watching the first few decisions carefully, but it looks like time is nearly up for relaxed or cynical approaches to compliance.  These features caught my eye:

• You get penalised if the outcome of a breach is serious, or likely to be, and the breach and outcome were foreseeable but not managed as such.  That puts virtually any business in the frame, and pushes organisations to put effort into DP risk assessment.
• Penalties will be used to neutralise commercial benefit.  There’s a commercial benefit to slack compliance.  Are we looking at that kind of compliance saving being charged in the end, by the regulator?

I’m surprised to see the regulator’s practice notes are treated as a benchmark in the guidance.  I find that difficult, because the recommendations do not cover all sectors or DP issues, and they’re not always easy to apply in practice.  Humph.   If you can build a business case for it, the on-the-shelf solution is British Standards compliance (which gets several endorsements in the guidance).

So we all need simple, quick, cost-effective ways of achieving compliance without a huge increase in the legal or consultancy bill, or the payroll of your compliance department.  If you think you’ve succeeded in setting up a great personal information management system, leave a comment, let me know.  I reckon I’ve got good solutions and I’d be happy to share ideas.

News: http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/pressreleases/2010/penalties_guidance_120110.pdf

BSI survey: http://www.bsigroup.com/About-BSI/News-Room/BSI-News-Content/Disciplines/Information-Management/BS-10012-publication/

BSI standards: http://shop.bsigroup.com/en/Browse-by-Subject/Data-Protection–Freedom-of-Information/?t=r