Is it? It is my understanding that the UK has had its own data protection laws, its own information commissioner to enforce this, and its own policy for over thirty years.
Not only does the much more onerous GDPR completely supercede laws we made ourselves, it is a huge ongoing cost to every business, to the extent where GDPR enforcement officials are employed and many American firms have simply decided not to bother showing website content to Europeans.
Data protection is necessary, I agree. Which is all the more reason to keep it in the hands of the British voter. This is just another area of policy weāve ceded our sovereignty on. GDPR is not necessary. To say otherwise is to demonstrate a lack of knowledge about extant practices and an ignorance of the vast amount of money itāll cost, forever.
Not sure why you bring up US web content distribution when the main purpose of GDPR is to standardise the protection of personal data held on identifiable individuals and how this can be used and distributed. Having worked in an industry /companies that holds personal data on over 140mil patients, I do know a bit about previous UK legislation versus international legislation. It matter not weather we have our own rulesā¦ we need to apply international standards if we wish to share and access personal informationā¦
And perhaps more pertinently, the point was actually a different one that you have missed. It means fuck all if we are IN or OUT of the EU, we will not suddenly be saving vasts amount of money by being able to avoid such legislationā¦ IF we want to trade with the EUā¦ same as we will need to conform with any requirements to trade with nations outside of the EUā¦ but as usual you ignore the point made and start rabbiting on about others being ignorant and lacking understanding of what the legislation is about because you wonāt ever concede a ducking pointā¦ which is typical of your ādebating styleā
Itās no fucking different to expecting imported kids toys to conform to our /EU safety standardsā¦
The net result of GDPR is that I have had to actively consent to my data being used in far more ways than I intended, just so I can view a website or buy something online.
I would say my data is more compromised, because when a company fucks up they will just point to their privacy policy and say āyou agreedā!and they would be right.
Most privacy policies are so wide, you could probably get away with murder if you put your to it. Ours as work certainly is, because wrote it.
The new regulations are a massive ballache and we still see plenty of examples of non-compliance. For me, this is the perfect problem domain for national determination, something we were already doing, and will go back to doing if we exit without a deal.
Have you tried visiting the LA Timesā website recently? Itās owned by a media group that took a look at GDPR, and said ānah, we canāt be arsed with thatā, and simply stopped serving Europe.
One of the many unintended consequences of Brexit, is that it increasingly looks like in the short term the government will need to take more of a direct role in the economy and other parts of daily life. As that is basically anathema to Tory philosophy, be interesting to see how they approach that and how the hardliners react.
True BT, but we have had a fair bit of time since then to work on global trade dealsā¦ is the absence of any āopportunityā merely poor planning or symptomatic of the fact we have fuck all of interest to those outside the EU from a service perspective ? ( We seem to have fuck all of value that will generate the fabled massive improvement in our balance of trade) ā¦
So, EITHER someone played a blinder last night in stitching Parliament up like a Kipper to ensure that there is no hard Brexit option, OR May has blundered down the rabbit hole and found a way out of the mess.
Interesting times. No doubt even MORE divisive to society as well.
I really donāt get this line of thinking. I say again, no deal is the default option. Any other option is both unlikely to command a Parliamentary majority and unable to get the assent of the European Union.
In other words, unlikely to be agreed.
If it is unlikely to be agreed, then weāre back to no deal.
I find it a little odd that āno dealā is considered a default optionā¦ a little bit of historic revisionism I think, as most Brexiteers when challenged pre Referendum about likely economic impact of Brexit were quick to reassure folks that A Brexit deal would be reached that would ensure stability and opportunity for the economyā¦ a no deal scenario was never presented as a desired or likely outcome.
Only after the result did the Brexit hardliners see a no deal outcome as another way to further disrupt and destabilise the government - encourage deeper division and look to be ready for the power vacuumā¦ on the left, no deal is a perfect outcome to force a GE which they think they can then go and winā¦
ā¦ I repeat this again, this whole farce has been the result of tory infighting and selfish positioning. The people of this country used as pawns in the game. The shameful misrepresentation of democracy. Both main parties now seeing this as a way to bring about governmental change