ICO confirms breach to complaining members – and advises them of legal right to compensation for harm suffered
The Information Commissioner’s Office has confirmed to a member that the party is in breach of its legal obligations under GDPR data protection laws – and has indicated that there are multiple such cases.
In a response to a complainant who has not receive a response to their ‘Subject Access Request’, a statutory, binding request to provide copies of all data held by an organisation on an individual, the ICO stated that it found Labour in breach – and advised that there are ‘a number’ of such cases:
The ICO, which has often been criticised for its lack of action on Labour’s breaches, also stated that it is not pursuing the party for these ongoing breaches – but that individuals have a statutory right to pursue legal action – and to receive compensation for any harm suffered:
Last year, Keir Starmer’s leadership campaign was reported to the ICO after ‘serious’ hacking of member data. The ICO does not appear to have taken any action. Labour members will need to pursue legal action against the party rather than rely on the ICO, if they wish to see the party brought to account.
GDPR law allows for fines of up to €20 million (c. £17.5 million) or 4% of an organisation’s turnover – whichever is the greater – for breaches.
The SKWAWKBOX needs your help. The site is provided free of charge but depends on the support of its readers to be viable. If you can afford to without hardship, please click here to arrange a one-off or modest monthly donation via PayPal or here to set up a monthly donation via GoCardless (SKWAWKBOX will contact you to confirm the GoCardless amount). Thanks for your solidarity so SKWAWKBOX can keep bringing you information the Establishment would prefer you not to know about.
If you wish to republish this post for non-commercial use, you are welcome to do so – see here for more.
Corrupted sharks with deep pockets can swim freely and do WTF they like where the pi55p00r ICO is concerned. Whereas small fry are quickly caught and destroyed.
“Shark infested” waters indeed due to Mass Indiscriminate Surveillance on the web, which Home Secretaries like Jack Straw, David Blunkett, John Reid, Jacqui Smith, Alan Johnson and one miserable non-NewLabout Home Secretary, Theresa May, instigated.
When historians look back on the exploitative excesses of neoliberal capitalism – e.g. university fees, precarious (‘agency’) employment and an ‘internal market’ marketisation of the NHS – they will see new Labour’s gruby hands all over it.
The lawlessness of new New Labour continues.
Too true john thatcher.
When CIA money paid for neo-liberals like Tony Blair and his “third-wayers” (or ‘tri-lateralists’ as they became known in the 21st century under Si Keir Rodney Starmer) to penetrate and destroy the UK’s democratic socialist Labour party, it produced the biggest bang any buck ever produced in any cosmos – EVER!.
qwertboi – Apple have really pissed off FaceBook with their new ‘App Tracking Transparency’ feature which stops apps tracking what users do on other apps without explicit permission.
https://www.apple.com/privacy/docs/A_Day_in_the_Life_of_Your_Data.pdf
Ahh! So they say, I don’t believe a word from any of the big Tech Co’s if there is an Open Source alternative use that, if not the only track free/safe device is a turned off and battery removed device.
In the spirit of that being a good thing, it is about time. Now they need one for Bezos and those Alexa things
Ah yes, the big bung theory, true at last.
Good attempt at distraction steveh: “Apple have really pissed off FaceBook…”
It won’t work with most people here.
We know both MAGA* tech giants are head-over-heels in bed with the neoliberal deep (American) state on this (and other things like covid)..
*’MAGA’ is not “make America great again” here, it’s an acronym of the satanic players of the deep American state – Microsoft, Apple, Google and Amazon – of course other authoritarian (anti-democratic) technology players exist (facebook, twitter, whatsapp et al)
Steveh – The article you link to is both useful and also a tribal ‘appleboy’ piece of PR distractability, and for this reasn I distrust its intention and see it as status-quo apologism (something, as an ‘unobservant’ Jew and a socialist who kvetches, I know all about). To me, it does two rather unpleasant things:
1) It fails to state that as-is GDPR is nothing more than a bare minimum framework promoted by neoliberal governments to deceive data users and allow them to (wrongly) believe that they matter to the tech giants, who, like google, see us and our personal data as their very lucrative property, which they commodify and use against us.
2) Despite being an Apple user since the late 1980s and recognising their former virtue (which ended with Steve Jobs) and the truly revolutionary capabilities of Unix and OS10, today I strongly distrust Apple Inc an see how its entire existence, is to provide the NDA and the American Deep (neoliberal) State with whatever it needs to keep ‘the Many’ under the control and management of the Few (the 0.01%).
Pathetic from the ICO. Aware of multiple breaches but are taking naff all enforcement action. What is the point of them? Even worse given political voting data and antisemitism / racism complaints are, I would suggest, very sensitive personal data that have several times been leaked to and published by the likes of the Jewish Chronicle and Daily Mail. Instead, there is no incentive for Labour staffers to clean up their sordid act.
Dave – The article above makes clear that the GDPR breaches relate to the party being late in fulfilling SARs (Subject Access Requests). This has nothing to do with the leaking of data.
Weak “self-policing” systems like GDPR snd the ‘controllers’ who deploy it never know anything about data leaks and the resultant violation(s) of data security until victims or perpetrators disclose them.
GDPR is neoliberal for a reason – it does f*ck-all to redress the imbalance of power that Mass Indiscriminate Surveillance gives the tech giants and the corporates that pay them for our legally obained personal data.
qwertboi – See my reply above at 2:48am
Steve H….You know exactly what has been going on for a long time in the Labour party and its somthing that our Lordship Tom Watson thought of his own info system to gain publicity from the toilet papers.Nothing much changes under Labour either second rate lawyer tribute act the knight,or fake left wing socialist.The Labour party is effectively bankrupt morally and politically….and probably technically bankrupt financially…ITs job ✔ for the knight whether he stays or goes.
Joseph – WTF does Tom Watson have to do with Labour being late fulfilling SARs
The data leak is another element of ongoing laxity in data management and therefore relevent.
lundiel – Which data leak would that be?
Those so called Commissions, Regulators, Watchdogs, etc are all Smokescreen Tory Corruption/Protection Agencies! GE2019 ICO issued “a stern warning” to all Parties not to cross the line, the only Party that did not cross the line and least likely to cross the line was The Democratic Socialist UK Labour Party, meaning ICO issued “a stern warning” to Team Corbyn ‘We are watching you and you alone!’
Everything needs to be abolished and each of these agencies replaced by multiple competing Open Source and Grassroot Agencies to remove any risk of Cronyism. It is by no means beneficial for the Public to have singular and easily corrupted Agencies who no longer work for the interest of the Public!
This very situation above, who challenges the ICO and also who challenges Ofcom, Electoral Commission, EHRC, etc, etc, etc The Law, if YOU the Public can afford it! Most can’t and especially in this day and age where the Law is just as easily corruptible, who can afford to take that gamble, we could do with several agencies who can challenge wrong/unfair verdicts. We are increasing living in a world of let me have the wafts of big bucks or Shut The Fuck UP!
Skellyknelly – you had me (and my like) at “Those so called Commissions, Regulators, Watchdogs, etc are all Smokescreen Tory Corruption/Protection Agencies!…..”
Sometimes the shorter the post the more effective it is (or so I’ve been told – 😁 )
I have four letters from the ICO with similar confirmation that the Labour party have infringed my rights to know what they were holding on me. Two instruct Labour GLU to supply me with a Subject Access Request and two instruct the CLP secretary himself to do the same. The reason for the two separate instructions is because of the way the Labour party have set up their obligations under GDPR. But they party do not tell members this and it was by chance that I obtained this information. If/when the GLU supply SARs, they do not necessarily include data from the CLP. This is vital in the context of what the Labour party have been doing with members data.
I also have a letter from the party solicitors which states the SAR they sent to me, (via my solicitor), was partial. My SAR from the CLP is also incomplete (I have evidence of the missing data from friends) but the CLP secretary has never complied with the ICO instruction and has further breached GDPR terms. Other examples of missing data and infringements of GDPR have been sent to the ICO, who appear either to be dragging their feet on holding the Labour party to account, or are so overworked leading to their being incompetent.
It’s well and good the ICO informing members of their legal rights to take the party to court. What they don’t say is that the costs are prohibitive for most people. I have looked into this possibility and the legal costs would be in the region of £25k. For those lucky enough to have them, that’s their life savings. Who would gamble that?
What we still don’t know is if the Labour party are being investigated formally by the ICO, or is it that the ICO are just working with members to obtain SAR’s? If it’s the latter, how can this be the reason for not publishing the Forde report? Questions still need to be answered.
Nemtona – I’d love to know how you progress on this – and yes, thank you for tying this dry, anoraky SARs issue with the ‘new management’s’ contemptible avoidance of Forde Report publication. Scum is as scum does.