Data needs protecting, but with discretion
So rapidly has the digital world expanded over the past 20 years that the 1998 Data Protection Act now looks positively antediluvian. The government’s announcement that it proposes to replace and update the legislation is, therefore, timely and unavoidable. In 1998, there was no Facebook, no Instagram and little in the way of online data that could be either compromising or easily compromised.
The original Act was designed to prevent personal information from being divulged to third parties. The new measure is, to some extent, intended to allow people who have already divulged their information to have it expunged. The aim is to give people power over their own data, potentially releasing its commercial value to benefit the individual rather than the internet giants who currently profit from its extraction.
Matt Hancock, the digital minister, said the new Bill would give the UK “one of the most robust, yet dynamic, set of data laws in the world”. IP addresses, DNA and computer cookies would fall under the description of personal data for the first time in law. But its principal purpose appears to be to ensure that after Brexit this country’s laws are compatible with those in Europe. It will transpose the EU’S upcoming General Data Protection Regulation into UK law with only slight modifications.
Although Britain is no longer required – or won’t be after March 2019 – to implement EU regulations, this seems a sensible measure to adopt to avoid any issues about data-sharing between British and European-based companies after the UK departs. If clarity is important for the business world, this is one area where it needs reassurance if trade is to continue without any great dislocation. Consumers equally need to trust that the information we all have to hand over nowadays for the most basic transactions is not being misused.
It is also important that the big holders of personal data like Facebook look sympathetically on requests for posts or photographs to be removed. There is no obvious reason why someone’s youthful online indiscretion should haunt them for the rest of their life. However, there need to be sensible exemptions. It is proposed to outlaw the intentional re-identification of someone who has successfully sought anonymity; yet there will be times when it is in the public interest to do so. This law will need to be very carefully drafted.