Kelly Fiveash writes in The Register:

Dame Fiona Caldicott, who is scrutinising the government’s plan to hand NHS patient records to private companies, today gave the proposals the thumbs-up – with a few caveats, naturally.

The noted psychiatrist’s review [PDF] of the data-sharing scheme was published just minutes ago.

Her report, drafted in March, follows Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt’s announcement that he wants a “paperless” NHS by 2018, one that will allow the private sector to access confidential digital medical records provided “permission” has been given.

Earlier this month, a Health and Social Care Information Centre (HSCIC) was created under the 2012 Health and Social Act, clearing the way for Hunt’s data-swapping dream in the cloud to become reality. The centre has the power to force health bodies to hand over “any information” that it deems “necessary or expedient”.

Later, she wrote:

Health Secretary Jeremy Hunt insisted this morning that NHS patients who have refused to give consent to existing data-sharing mechanisms would be safeguarded under the government’s new plans to open up information across the service.

The Cabinet minister confirmed to The Register that the 750,000 patients throughout England who have already opted out of having their data shared would be automatically protected.

When asked if those privacy settings would be wiped out, Hunt told us: “No,” and added: “We will respect those who have already opted out.”

He was less clear, however, about how those patients who have already rejected having their information shared would be ringfenced from the Department of Health’s plans.

The Caldicott Review can be download here.

Kelly Fiveash writes for The Register:

Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg has strongly rejected Home Office plans to massively ramp up surveillance of Brits’ internet activity in a very public rebuttal of Theresa May’s proposals this morning.

“The ‘Snooper’s Charter’ isn’t going to happen – the idea that there would be a record kept of all your online activity,” Clegg told listeners on his weekly LBC radio show. “It won’t happen while Lib Dems are in government. Of course we need to support the police, they have significant powers already which I support them in using.”

He added:

“This idea of a ‘Snooper’s Charter’ – I think it isn’t workable or proportionate,” before repeating “it isn’t going to happen.”

There’s also a related item on the Big Brother Watch web site.

Sara Kelly writes in the Daily Telegraph:

The plan, which is set to cost £1.8 billion, would require any internet based company who is ordered to by the Home Office, to develop a system where all data on their customers is collected, stored in a standardised format, and potentially available via automated access where the business would not have any oversight of the data leaving their systems. Forcing small businesses to front the costs for retaining and maintaining data they would not normally collect presents a huge barrier to entry that could crush a startup. It’s not just the cost of the hardware required, its the opportunity cost of diverting a talented individual from developing a product onto maintaining a state-required and standardised data retention system.

This also fundamentally misunderstands the way startups are developed. The very architecture of a digital business is founded upon what data they choose to collect and the way they collect it. They develop a product, release it early, and improve they systems step by step as they interpret the data they’ve collected. Forcing them to spend time building these systems, with technical requirements dictated by the Home Office, limits how quickly they’re able to grow and improve their product for their customers, holding back innovation and keeping startups stuck in the past for the foreseeable future.

Michael Savage writes in The Times:

Sweeping plans to hand the security services the power to snoop on e-mails, website visits and social media sites are dangerous and must be abandoned, David Cameron has been warned.

Cyber-security experts have written to the Prime Minister saying that the proposals “will be expensive, will hinder innovation and will undermine the privacy of citizens”. It is a blow to the credibility of the proposals, which are undergoing major revisions after opposition from Nick Clegg, the Deputy Prime Minister and leader of the Liberal Democrats.

More here.

UPDATE (23 Apr): The full text of the letter is on the Big Brother Watch web site. The list of ten signatories is reported by Tech Eye.

Robert Watts writes in The Telegraph:

The Home Office is facing legal action unless it reveals key details of its so-called Snooper’s Charter.

Theresa May, the Home Secretary, has so far declined to explain a proposed “filtering” system that would allow officials to trawl through the public’s private emails, text messages and other messages sent through the internet.

Conservative MPs have been demanding greater clarity of the Mrs May’s plans since last summer. They fear that such technology represents “a tectonic shift in the relationship between the citizen and the state”.

The Information Commissioner has now ordered the Home Office to publish advice ministers received on the design, cost and risks of the new filtering system by May 11.

Mr Raab said: “This far-reaching scheme could drain the swamp of every email, text message and phone call made by every citizen, a tectonic shift in the relationship between the citizen and the state.

“So, it’s astonishing that Home Office bureaucrats are risking contempt of court by trying to cover up the most basic information on how the scheme will operate in practice.”