Quote:
Originally Posted by Jim
Thanks Graham, I will have a read  |
Best do it when you don't mind dropping to sleep Jim
The actual legislation (both DPA and HRA) is relatively straightforward if approached logically.
Problems have tended to arise with the DPA over the years only where organisations have invested too little in training their staff in using it. The provisions for protectiion of data apply sensibly and there are provisions for sharing data where it is properly warranted (e.g. the Ian Huntly case).
The HRA on the other hand, whilst being relatively strightforward, causes problems because it was the first big Act for New Labour and is too aligned to party dogma rather than the needs of the UK. In passing legislation to give effect to the European Convention on Human Rights, countries are allowed "get out" clauses, known as derogations, which enable the legislation to be tailored to be aligned to the traditions and national characteristics of each country.
Blair's government, unfortunately, allowed political theory to hold sway over the interests of the country. That is why, for instance, prisoners who receive insufficient drugs to prevent them undergoing cold turkey can claim damages because their human rights have been breached.
The current government could, of course, amend the legislation to close such loopholes - but that, of course, would mean admitting that they got it wrong in the first place.
Graham
P.S. This is not a pop at Labour just because they are Labour but purely because they got the HRA wrong and have the power to put it right.
Linear Mode
