Discussing UK law. Links: swarb.co.uk | law-index | Acts | Members Image galleries

Useless ICO

Copyright, Trade Marks, Patents, Information Law etc

Re: Useless ICO

Postby Spankymonkey » Fri Jan 06, 2017 8:09 pm

It was Her Majesty's Prison Reading then.


So Wilde had no excuses for getting it wrong then.

Take that ridiculous quote when customs asked if he had anything to declare. What did he reply? "Nothing but my genius." Well I tried that coming back from Tenerife one year. Customs threw me onto the ground and had their latex gloved hands so far up my back passage they could feel the inside of my hat.

Try turning that into a fashionable poem.
Spankymonkey
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2016 8:42 am

Re: Useless ICO

Postby Smouldering Stoat » Fri Jan 06, 2017 8:18 pm

I'm sure that, had he not died in 1900, Oscar Wilde would have bowed to your superior knowledge of scansion and metre.
Smouldering Stoat
 
Posts: 6221
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 6:31 pm
Location: Near the Creek.

Re: Useless ICO

Postby Spankymonkey » Fri Jan 06, 2017 8:23 pm

Smouldering Stoat wrote:I'm sure that, had he not died in 1900, Oscar Wilde would have bowed to your superior knowledge of scansion and metre.


Scansion and metre? Are they the ones that wrote "Dads Army"?
Spankymonkey
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2016 8:42 am

Re: Useless ICO

Postby Goldensyrup » Fri Jan 06, 2017 11:41 pm

The ICO are worse than 'not fit for purpose'. Populated by officers who have no legal knowledge and who adjudicate between public body legal professionals and complainants their default position is always to agree with the PB's position to save cost. Complainants concerned with exactly what the ICO have done over a long period of difficulty with a complaint concerning a PB can ask for a data access request.

The real problem with the ICO is that all PBs know how useless they are and will flout the legislation with complete impunity.
Goldensyrup
 
Posts: 224
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 11:52 pm

Re: Useless ICO

Postby Spankymonkey » Sat Jan 07, 2017 4:17 am

Goldensyrup wrote:The ICO are worse than 'not fit for purpose'. Populated by officers who have no legal knowledge and who adjudicate between public body legal professionals and complainants their default position is always to agree with the PB's position to save cost. Complainants concerned with exactly what the ICO have done over a long period of difficulty with a complaint concerning a PB can ask for a data access request.

The real problem with the ICO is that all PBs know how useless they are and will flout the legislation with complete impunity.


I agree. They belong in the same scrap heap as the IPCC. The IPCC being the very authority who are refusing to comply with my request.
Spankymonkey
 
Posts: 330
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2016 8:42 am

Re: Useless ICO

Postby b1969 » Sat Jan 07, 2017 8:23 am

Goldensyrup wrote:The ICO are worse than 'not fit for purpose'. Populated by officers who have no legal knowledge and who adjudicate between public body legal professionals and complainants their default position is always to agree with the PB's position to save cost. Complainants concerned with exactly what the ICO have done over a long period of difficulty with a complaint concerning a PB can ask for a data access request.

The real problem with the ICO is that all PBs know how useless they are and will flout the legislation with complete impunity.


Absolute rubbish. I criticise the ICO frequently: I think they have often much too light a touch when it comes to regulation and enforcement, and I think they should certainly be tougher with some recalcitrant public authorities, but to suggest "they always agree with the public authority to save cost" has no basis in reality. Since the Freedom of Information Act commenced in 2005 the ICO have issued decisions on just over 11000 FOI cases - in over 5000 of those they have either upheld or partly upheld the requester's complaint.
b1969
 
Posts: 297
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2012 1:48 pm

Re: Useless ICO

Postby dls » Sat Jan 07, 2017 9:26 am

Properly said
David Swarbrick (Admin) dswarb@gmail.com - 0795 457 9992
User avatar
dls
Site Admin
 
Posts: 12013
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2012 1:35 pm
Location: Brighouse, West Yorkshire

Re: Useless ICO

Postby atticus » Sat Jan 07, 2017 9:30 am

We often see people extrapolating a general rule from their own individual case.
User avatar
atticus
 
Posts: 19192
Joined: Sun Nov 11, 2012 2:27 pm
Location: E&W

Re: Useless ICO

Postby Goldensyrup » Sat Jan 07, 2017 11:54 am

Perhaps I was extrapolating from personal experience with the ICO over a number of years and including anecdotal evidence of those who are like minded. I would suggest a scan of the whatdotheyknow website to see how appalling public bodies are in adhering to the legislation.

B1969 'absolute rubbish' is very disingenuous. As you well know 11,000 DN's, 5,000 (45%) of which uphold or partly uphold over 11 years is a drop in the ocean to the default business as usual responses to complainants who do not push to a DN and except the inconsistent reasonings given by officers to close down complaints as quickly and cost efficiently as possible. I would be more impressed with the total numbers from the ICO.

The concept that 'I have a right to information' via the 2002 act only applies in my experience if the public body decide it wishes to release that information to you and when the don't when they should it is an uphill struggle in which the ICO are as useful as a chocolate teapot.

The ICO do not uphold the ideals of the act except is a small number of cases.
Goldensyrup
 
Posts: 224
Joined: Sat Jan 12, 2013 11:52 pm

Re: Useless ICO

Postby b1969 » Sat Jan 07, 2017 2:05 pm

Sorry - absolute rubbish again.

Goldensyrup wrote: I would suggest a scan of the whatdotheyknow website to see how appalling public bodies are in adhering to the legislation.


I spend a lot of time on WDTK - I know the volunteers who run it and have advised on a new iteration of it. For all its faults it has helped to make a huge amount of information public. I suggest that again your view is skewed by your own experiences.

I have worked in and commentated on the field of FOI since the Act was passed in 2000 (not 2002) and have made use of it hundreds of times since it commenced in 2005 - in the former guise I have disclosed huge amounts of information, and in the latter I have had disclosed to me huge amounts. None of this would have happened without the Act.

I'm not pretending that things could not be better, but as the Justice Committee said, in its report following post-legislative scrutiny, the Act has been a significant enhancement of our democracy, and it disappoints me to see unwarranted criticism of it. Similarly, the ICO are by no means perfect, but they do some very good work with limited resources.
b1969
 
Posts: 297
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2012 1:48 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Intellectual Property

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests