Leatherhead Matters

At the end of last year we learned (See Nov 2007 post for details) that HMRC lost CDs containing details of half the UK population (& still not found) and also the DLVA lost the personal records of 3m learner drivers Various Departmental inquiries were set up. Alistair Darling appointed Kieran Poynter, the chairman of PricewaterhouseCooper to establish what went wrong. His interim report can be read HERE. Gus O’Donnell, the Head of the Civil Service was appointed to lead the national investigation into government data handling. In December’s interim report Gus O’Donnell concluded that the Ministry of Defence (MOD) had no major problems except around bulk data transfers. The department, we were told, had “reassessed its policies and procedures in light of the incident with HMRC data, and is taking forward work to ensure that bulk data transfers are better protected and will make more explicit the need for early involvement of Data Protection Act specialists“.

We now know that this was total baloney! The MoD has been cavalierly transferring highly sensitive personal data about potential recruits to laptops which have then been stolen. There appears to have been no attempt to protect the data by encryption or, any other standard private sector method. We are now told that all Government laptops, which could contain sensitive data are being impounded until civil servants have learnt how to encrypt, and unencrypt, the data on their machines.

How many inquiries, how many further personal data losses will it take before this incompetent Government takes seriously the protection of its citizen’s personal data?

They have now lost the personal details of more than half the population. When are we each going to find out from the Government if our own personal data is among that which they have lost, so we can take appropriate steps?

Anatole Kaletsky’s (Times) views on economic matters are always a must read. Today he has a truly devastating article which rips apart Brown & Darling’s rescue package for Northern Rock:

Yesterday…..”Mr Brown handed over the keys to the Treasury to Sir Richard Branson and Goldman Sachs, destroying in the process the entire economic and political framework that he created as Chancellor in 1997. With Britain’s foreign policy still firmly in the hands of the White House and European policy managed from Brussels, it is hard to see why Mr Brown bothers to turn up to work.” 

Read the full article HERE

From time to time the USA produces truly inspirational individuals. John Kennedy, Martin Luther King, Ronald Reagan are but examples.

It looks like we should start to think about Barack Obama as a potential candidate to join this distinguished group. Yesterday he delivered a truly inspiring oration at a church in Atlanta.

Obama is everything that Gordon Brown is not. Leadership is about creating “followership” through setting out an inspiring vision. Read Obama’s speach HERE and tell me you don’t get a lump in your throat or, even just a tingle? Then ask yourself whether Gordon Brown will ever be capable of delivering the same sensation?

Obama is up against an awesome, experienced, political machine in the Clintons.  It’s old, dynasty politics vs youth & inspiration. It’s going to be fascinating to see how this plays to US voters over the next few months.

A new website claims to introduce the first “Personal Genome Service” to help you read & understand your DNA. For a $1000 you are provided with an (in home) saliva sampling kit. After submitting the sample the Company analyse the DNA and then provide you with a report. A series of interactive tools are provided which help you to shed new light on your distant ancestors, your close family and most of all, yourself.

I can imagine that as this technology matures and the cost reduces, it will support whole new industries:

1. Government Border Control authorities could use this service to provide biometric identification at the point of entry.
2. Paternity cases could be more quickly resolved by mother’s taking a quick saliva sample from dad’s beer glass.
3. Cash Machines (ATMs) could operate on a “lick & pay” basis.
4. New web based services could provide false identities by collecting & storing the spittle of Bedouin tribesmen.

Please feel free to add your own suggestions below.

John Bourn is retiring after 20 years as the Comptroller & Auditor General of the National Audit Office (”Helping the Nation Spend Wisely”!). The role of the NAO is to audit the financial statements of all government departments & agencies and to report to Parliament on “value for money”.

To supplement his Civil Service pension Mr Bourn has just published a new book “Public Sector Auditing”. The title suggests it probably won’t make the best seller lists but, Mr Bourn’s insights are based on his unique position to make a critical assessment of the functioning of H.M. Government & the Civil Service.

Mr Bourn has a deserved reputation for plain speaking and he doesn’t hold back in his book! He is both critical & damning of public sector bureaucracy which, he says, looks:

• inward not outward
• to processes not outcomes
• to hierarchies, rather than teams
• to rules rather than initiatives
• to detachment from, rather than engagement in human interests

Phew! No wonder Bourn has been on the receiving end of leaks & spin. I do hope the new appointee takes an equally independent & critical view. The pity is that, based on the last few years. no one in government appears to be reading his reports!

Perhaps Mr Bourn will use his experience to contribute to a modern day version of “Yes Minister” since he must by now know all the tricks of the trade used by civil servants & ministers. For example, my favourite (longest, one sentence) Sir Humphrey’s response to Minister Jim Hacker on why Hacker’s proposal couldn’t proceed:

Well, it’s clear that the committee has agreed that your new policy is a really excellent plan but in view of some of the doubts being expressed, may I propose that I recall that after careful consideration, the considered view of the committee was that while they considered that the proposal met with broad approval in principle, that some of the principles were sufficiently fundamental in principle and some of the considerations so complex and finely balanced in practice, that, in principle, it was proposed that the sensible and prudent practice would be to submit the proposal for more detailed consideration, laying stress on the essential continuity of the new proposal with existing principles, and the principle of the principle arguments which the proposal proposes and propounds for their approval, in principle.