A House of Commons Committee has given its seal of approval to the Ministry of Justice's choice to be the new Information Commissioner, clearing the way for the appointment of Christopher Graham to the post. Current Commissioner Richard Thomas retires in June and the Ministry of Justice previously announced Advertising Standards …
Faceless, actionless, mate of the boys. At best he'll do nothing at all, most likely, reinforce any tinpot legislation the "Ministry of Justice" wants passed.
A basis for trust?
"Ask him anything"
Asking questions, even the right questions has never been much of a problem.
Getting truthful answers is where the problem lies.
Even if Mr Graham is able to answer truthfully will he be allowed to?
I really do wish I was not so cynical, but a decade of government lies, half truths and cover ups does leave its mark.
Why waste the salary?
They may as well have bought a cardboard cut out of someone famous and wheeled it out as needed for press calls. It would be at least as much use as Richard Thomas was, and no doubt his successor, who will presumaby continue the ICOs tradition of doing nothing useful.
Farewell to one of my namesakes
Always funny to see my name on the Reg ;-)
As for the new guy coming from the ASA, what a perfect appointment. From one toothless talking shop to another.
Salmon Live In Trees And Eat Pencils
"The Information Commissioner needs to be an independent and fearless champion of both data protection and freedom of information, with the resources to run an office that is efficient enough to be taken seriously"
If the Information Commissioner needs to be all these things, why has the ICO shown itself to be as ball-less as a castrato choirboy?
One word: PHORM - The ICO should have taken names and kicked major arse. It didn't.
There's more chance of my opening the batting for the West Indies than the ICO being a peoples' champion and standing up for our privacy.
... the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) remained separate from Government.
When's it going to happen?
I wouldn't worry too much about it but ...
a) the costs will go astronomical
b) all it will do is log everything that nobody will ever look at apart from the auditors just to make sure what should have been logged was logged
c) all of its key performance indicators or even just plain old performance indicators will be so glib they will only show that the base assumptions were the correct ones because those were the only events logged anyway
d) a heavy dependency upon outside consultants and outside specialists will follow and these will, of course, be gleamed from the organisations creating or using technologies that the phorce should be investigating anyway (nobody ever observes that the investigated should never really be advisors or consultants to the investigating organisation [see z])
e) the first prioritised priority is the big wage increase 18 months hence plus a gradual phasing in of additional non-cash benefits
z) ensure that buddies, friends or the offspring thereof are recruited as a matter of priority especially as this "IT thing" seems to be a bit of a runner, has potential to pull down additional funding streams and will be a nice little earner to all involved [hush now!]
- Tricked by satire? Get all your news from Facebook? You're in luck, dummy
- Feature TV transport tech, part 1: From server to sofa at the touch of a button
- Google straps on Jetpac: An app to find hipsters, women in foreign cities
- Updated Microsoft Azure goes TITSUP (Total Inability To Support Usual Performance)
- The Return of BSOD: Does ANYONE trust Microsoft patches?