Today’s first letter addresses the problems caused by the GDPR Legislation especially for the small, non-commercial sites and blogs. It comes into effect tomorrow, 25th May 2018. We at UKIP Daily have struggled with this as well as the Party, and we spend many hours over the last couple of months to work out how best to do it. This letter by Geoffrey Bastin, Bexhill and Battle Branch chairman, ought to help to put minds at rest:

Sir,

Please see the following article I have written for local consideration in UKIP East Sussex. Everyone is rushing around trying to jump through hoops just because of a stupid bit of EU legislation that has got out of hand. All my thoughts on not having to register at branch level seem to have fallen on deaf ears despite my pointing everyone to the ICO website where they can take a self assessment test and draw their own conclusions:

People who register (notify) under General Data Protection:

Many businesses are required by law to ‘notify’ certain specified information to the Information Commissioner. This may contain personal information, for example where the business is a sole trader. The ICO compiles this information into a register which it is required by law to make publicly available. The ICO cannot therefore give any guarantees as to how the information contained on the register will be used by those accessing it.”

You couldn’t make it up.  Here we have a new government sponsored  organization to administer a new data protection policy and they admit that they will make their new register publicly available to whoever applies and over which they have no control of it’s future usage.

What on earth do we need a new data protection policy for if those administrating it release their own register to the general public.

Either our individual or organisational data is secure and only able to be accessed by the compiling organisation or the whole process is a nonsense as it appears little or no benefit can be gained from this revised legislation.

We all know it has been devised to try and prevent the large organizations from dealing in and trafficking personal information to every Tom, Dick and Harry (not the Duke of Sussex) but on present showing it is only being used to generate money for the ICO and numerous firms that have set themselves up as experts to ease us through the latest minefield.

We have been here before when ISO 9000 was introduced and we all tried to jump through hoops to comply.  The treat then was that failure to comply would mean no more orders from public companies that were working on government contracts. It soon fizzled out and life continued.  We know this legislation has been introduced by the EU with some considerable input from the UK so we must make an appearance of compliance where necessary whilst folding it neatly and placing it in the wastepaper bin.”

Oh, by the way – no individual UKIP branch needs to register as the information held is purely for its own purposes and falls under the heading of a club.  Check out the ICO website and take the self assessment test and see for yourself.

This is another example of UKIP failing to make the weather over a nonsensical piece of unnecessary EU legislation.

Respectfully,

Geoffrey Bastin, Chairman of Bexhill & Battle branch

The next letter is about Dartmoor Prison and comes from the Newton Abbot Chairman David Gunn. Hopefully, some of our contributors and readers will pick up on his proposal:

Sir,

I’ve attached a copy of the letter I sent to the Mid Devon Advertiser yesterday (print edition only, so no link). It’s prompted by a story they ran this week on the possible closure of Dartmoor Prison. It may be a topic your readers and contributors could pursue and put a UKIP spin on “Crime & Punishment”. It won’t hurt to include items other than Brexit”

“Sir,

In your last edition, (18th May), you ran a story about the possible closure of Dartmoor prison. Whilst it’s unarguable that it is dated to the Napoleonic era, that doesn’t justify the case for closure. Prisons are not hotels, they are primarily an institution for punishment by removing criminals from public life.

Public perception of the Criminal Justice System is that it’s unfit for purpose since too few felons get sent to prison and of those that are, do not serve the full term of their sentences.

The local MPs you quote make a fair point that Dartmoor can and should be used for West Country prisoners so that their families can have easier contact with them.

Now for a suggestion – On the early morning BBC show “Ill gotten gains” last week, a former criminal was running a scheme to show youngsters just what prison is like and is funded by the “Proceeds of Crime” fund. I thought this an excellent idea and one which could be rolled out here in the West Country, perhaps a section of Dartmoor Prison with its dark & foreboding reputation could be made over to just this type of scheme. Being in a real prison with the sights, sounds & smells of reality, it should have a sobering effect on young offenders. I see this idea being similar to the “Drivers awareness course” used for wayward motorists. They’ve done wrong but do not get custodial sentences.

In any event, I support keeping Dartmoor prison open.”

Respectfully, David Gunn, Chairman UKIP Newton Abbot

 

Print Friendly, PDF & Email