大象传媒

Do I detect a common thread? Guess which Labour Minister has (over a
short career) been the Minister of
Transport (responsible for DVLA and airline security checks), Minister of e-Government (in charge of data insecurity in all govt departments), Minister of State at The Cabinet Office (responsible for the previous review of Contingency Planning for floods and other emergencies), part-time Secretary of State for Scotland
(responsible for the election fiasco in which '000s were disenfranchised),
and General Election co-ordinator - for a Labour Party now lagging in the polls? Step forward Mr Douglas
Alexander MP, brother of the hapless Wendy Alexander who is herself in trouble in Scotland, and confidante of Gordon 'McAvity' Broon at No 10.

As for that Basra handover: surely the two most emblematic images are
those of the training exercise the
大象传媒 featured to coincide with this
handover in which a British officer
tells the interviewer that he has not ever seen any of these people
outside the secure compound so had no idea how they would behave back
in their own communities (as pics
in the background showed an Iraqi
without a broom-handle far less a rifle playing 'air Kalashnikov'as he stormed a mockup of a house in Basra in true Dad's Army style); and that other picture of the Prime Minister
in waiting (Foreign Secretary David Miliband) brushing his head with a hand as he wondered yet again where was Mr Brown at a moment of history.

Why do the 大象传媒 always insist on blaming the Government,please tell me what minister lost the data?
Do you mean a person employed by the government lost the data?
I have heard people on 大象传媒 programmes condone the war in Iraq,does that mean that the 大象传媒 condones it?
When I started listening to the 大象传媒 sixty years ago, they reported the news,they did not comment on it.By the way, 大象传媒 pronunciation used to be absolutely spot on,now it is farcical.

Love it that Stephanie's economic reports are always on when Paxo is- just because he loves those graphs so much!!

How can this incompetent Labour Government be trusted ?
1.) Why is the public not aware of where data about them is held ?
2.) Why is it available to an American company ? What is it doing on a hard drive in America ?
3.) Why was the data loss incident not reported ?
4.) Why is such sensitive personal data not routinely encrypted ?
5.) Why are government agency staff able to obtain such vast quantities of personal data so easily and without disclosing a reasonable purpose ?
The only circumstance of such a degree of infringement of personal freedom, privacy and total disregard for personal respect and trust is a communist state. Not so long ago we were innocent until proven guilty. The real offenders are the hypoctrites who call themselves a government. They are a shambolic disgrace. And they are ruining British life with punitive restrictions, and as such are a virulent disease upon the people of Britain. We will need years of our rain to cleanse the nation from such an infestation of pestilence.

A handbag! "To lose documents once is an accident, twice is a coincedence, three times is enemy action." Oscar Wilde as usual describes it perfectly.

Aaargh, how does the physical loss of CDs and a hard drive indicate that a centralised secure database is a bad thing? Honestly, how do people expect a government to function without collecting and distributing personal data. It is far more risky to have your details spread across hundreds of different organisations than contained in just one. More capacity for mistakes, for compromise and for catastrophe.

If anything, these losses indicate that a centralised, secure online system is exactly what is needed to eradicate such problems. A national database with controlled, encrypted access will put an end to these piecemeal personal information transfers that can get lost halfway around the world. In addition, government organisations need to get over their mistaken assumption that sticking things in the post is more secure than encrypted digital transfer. Physical information transfer is fraught with opportunities for compromise at every level.

If people understood how to use their computers safely and securely, this sort of thing would not be an issue. Unfortunately, most organisations (public or private sector) are, as always, unwilling to invest the resources in adequate IT training.

A handbag! "To lose documents once is an accident, twice is a coincedence, three times is enemy action." Oscar Wilde as usual describes it perfectly.

Can we have more reports like the Iraq film last night? It was a really clear look at what has happened. We need more reporters like the man in the film.

From the Pearson Driving Assessment Ltd. website, in the testimonials section: 鈥淲e chose Pearson VUE to deliver our 1.7 million driving theory tests each year because of their strong commitment to customer service and the quality and security of their systems.鈥� Jill Lewis, Head of e-Assessment, Driving Standards Agency.

Basra

'We came , We saw, We Left'

Debbie,
your approach to 'the physical loss of CDs and a hard drive', and your ideas regarding databases appear to miss the concerns that most of us have. Are you a civil servant?

The public concern is not due to CDs being physically lost, but instead due to the way in which citizens personal data has been compromised in multiple instances by governmental agencies for no good reason.

A government department may need some personal data from some citizens to carry out that departments specified duties, but that does not mean that department should share that data with any other department regardless of whether they might use the post or encrypted digital transfer to share.

I take it that when you express support for 'a national database with controlled, encrypted access' you support the governments proposed National Identity Register. The letter to the Chair of the Joint Committee on Human Rights at
clarifies the 'fairy-tale view of the capabilities of the technology' which the government and you appear to share.

The National Identity Register is exactly what any totalitarian government would want. Perhaps Newsnight could get a government Minister to explain in detail precisely how this expensive nightmare would benefit a democracy such as ours?

(Re: the NIR - the comment here
by John Munyard is also worth reading.)

(Hope this comment doesn't repeat but I keep getting the 502 message.)

DATA CUSTODIANS & DEVOLVED GOVERNMENT

Once upon a time there was a UK Civil Service staffed by people who had jobs for life and loyalty to the Crown as a consequence. It was quite good. Then along came some bright sparks who said that Civil Servants were Stalinists and didn't need to maintain databases etc, instead, that should be farmed out and done far more cost-effectively/efficiently by the Private Sector or Third Sector (e.g. companies like Pearsons and The Fisher Family Trust - the latter a registered charity which is part of Research Machines).

Given that New Labour has chanted that its practices and policies are 'data driven', guess who has the information (power) to advise?

It's truly Kafkaesque, and listening to Ruth Kelly trot out the same old New Labour rhetoric it's really quite frightening. They would appear to have no grasp at all of the corrupt cynicism which permeates the de-regulated Private and Third sectors to whom they've eagerly devolve so much of government business.

Or have they? Is this not what they really mean by devolving more government to 'the people'?

Why is anyone surprised by these data fiascos?

Identity Cards are a good idea, but only if one has a government rather than a group of spin doctors/politicians abrogating government in the name of market efficiency etc. Of course they're incompetent, they are by policy are they not?

Whoa Jeremy, steady! I'm not a natural fan of the Lib Dems, but your interview with Nick Clegg was a departure into an unattractive 'clunking' technique. 'Tell me twenty interesting things' about the lib dems? Come on, which politician could answer the equivalent question? He's just won the leadership and is setting out his policies and views - that's what interests the viewers, but we nearly didn't hear the answer. Let viewers judge his qualities as a politician, not yours as a 'difficult' interviewer. You're in danger of becoming a caricature of yourself!

other than that, love it!