News
UK’s proposed data protection reforms - a step in the wrong direction?
The proposed reforms to data protection laws by the UK government are ones that have been longed promised in a post-Brexit world and their aim is to create an ambitious, pro-growth and innovation-friendly data protection regime. This article explores some of the key proposals, the current environment in which these proposals are operating in and the effects they could have on the future of data protection laws in the UK and beyond, especially the EU adequancy decision.
The Consultation
The consultation on proposed reforms to UK data protection laws was launched in September 2021 and revolved around five key objectives:
- Reducing barriers to responsible innovation;
- Reducing burdens on businesses and delivering better outcomes for people;
- Boosting trade and reducing barriers to data flows;
- Delivering better public services; and
- Reforming the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO), the UK’s regulator for data protection.
In relation to reducing barriers to responsible innovation, the UK government wants to make it easier for organisations to establish legal basis for processing data in areas such as research, AI and machine learning, with the aim to strike a better balance between protecting individuals and encouraging responsible innovation. Its main proposal to achieve this better balance is to create an exhaustive list of legitimate interests, allowing organisations who come within this list to use personal data without applying the current balance test.
To reduce the burden on businesses, the UK government proposes removing the obligation to, amongst others, appoint a data protection officer, prepare records of processing activities and conduct data protection impact assessments. There are also plans to relax the rules on analtyical cookies, where consent would no longer be needed (consent will remain a requirement for marketing and tracking cookiers) or if there is a legitimate purpose for processing the data. Another proposal to reduce redtape on businesses is the voluntary undertakings process. This mirrors a regime in Singapore, affording businesses an opportunity to avoid an ICO enforcement action for breaching UK data protection laws by presenting a remedial plan to the ICO of the actions they intend to take to address those breaches.
The UK government aims to boost trade and reducing barriers to data flow by allowing organisations to create alternative transfer mechanisms in addition to those provided under Article 46 UK GDPR. The UK government has stated its desire to establish data partnerhips with countries like the USA and South Korea, so these new transfer mechanisms could facilitate greater international data transfers. It will be an area of high interest for businesses that currently or wishes to have international transfers of data (albeit noting the potential for a knock on effect to the adequacy decision of the EU with respect to the UK).
A new Commissioner
An interesting backdrop to these porposed reforms is that the UK has a new Information Commissioner, John Edwards, who succeeded Elizabeth Denham on 4 January 2022. Edwards previously worked as New Zealand Privacy Commissioner and has a reputation of being a critic of Big Tech. However, in his new role he will be tasked with the delicate balancing act between respecting the individual’s right to privacy, while enabling actors to reap the benefits of data-driven innovation. His appointment has been welcomed by some, who hope that the ICO will retun to a more consistent and proportionate enforcement regime and focus on issues of concern to individuals while applying the pragmatism and consultative approach that the ICO has long been known for. It will be interesting to observe the types of actions the ICO pursues under Edwards, as they could provide valueable insight as to the path the ICO will take under its new leadership.
EU Adequacy – what now?
However, the “elephant in the room” for all of these proposals is the potential impact on the EU’s adequacy decision, which enables a free flow of data between companies in the UK and EU. If the EU feels that these reforms do not sufficiently protect its citizens’ data, then the EU could be revoke its adequacy decision. Revocation of the the adequacy decision would arguably represent a step backwards, creating uncertainty and complicance risks for organisations, at a time when they have just completed their implementation programmes for the 2018 EU General Data Protection Regulation reforms. The unintended consequences of a revocation would arguably outweigh the benefits offered by the reforms and the UK government seems to be aware of this as the reforms outlined above do not seem to radically diverge from the protections currently offered under the GDPR. There have also been attempts in the accompanying documents to cost the proposed reforms. However, the ultimate decision rests with the EU Commission, which no doubt will scrutinise these proposals closely and take appropriate action should they translate into UK law.
A legislative bill, detailing the proposed data protectection reforms, is expected to be released by June 2022. It will be keenly observed by the EU Commission, businesses and law professionals alike as to which direction the UK governement wants to take the UK’s data protection regime. Watch this space.
Article provided by INPLP member: Jonathan Kirsop (Pinsent Masons, United Kingdom)
Discover more about INPLP, the INPLP-Members and the GDPR-FINE database
Dr. Tobias Höllwarth (Managing Director INPLP)
News Archiv
- Alle zeigen
- November 2024
- Oktober 2024
- September 2024
- August 2024
- Juli 2024
- Juni 2024
- Mai 2024
- April 2024
- März 2024
- Februar 2024
- Jänner 2024
- Dezember 2023
- November 2023
- Oktober 2023
- September 2023
- August 2023
- Juli 2023
- Juni 2023
- Mai 2023
- April 2023
- März 2023
- Februar 2023
- Jänner 2023
- Dezember 2022
- November 2022
- Oktober 2022
- September 2022
- August 2022
- Juli 2022
- Mai 2022
- April 2022
- März 2022
- Februar 2022
- November 2021
- September 2021
- Juli 2021
- Mai 2021
- April 2021
- Dezember 2020
- November 2020
- Oktober 2020
- Juni 2020
- März 2020
- Dezember 2019
- Oktober 2019
- September 2019
- August 2019
- Juli 2019
- Juni 2019
- Mai 2019
- April 2019
- März 2019
- Februar 2019
- Jänner 2019
- Dezember 2018
- November 2018
- Oktober 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- Juli 2018
- Juni 2018
- Mai 2018
- April 2018
- März 2018
- Februar 2018
- Dezember 2017
- November 2017
- Oktober 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- Juli 2017
- Juni 2017
- Mai 2017
- April 2017
- März 2017
- Februar 2017
- November 2016
- Oktober 2016
- September 2016
- Juli 2016
- Juni 2016
- Mai 2016
- April 2016
- März 2016
- Februar 2016
- Jänner 2016
- Dezember 2015
- November 2015
- Oktober 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- Juli 2015
- Juni 2015
- Mai 2015
- April 2015
- März 2015
- Februar 2015
- Jänner 2015
- Dezember 2014
- November 2014
- Oktober 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- Juli 2014
- Juni 2014
- Mai 2014
- April 2014
- März 2014
- Februar 2014
- Jänner 2014
- Dezember 2013
- November 2013
- Oktober 2013
- September 2013
- August 2013
- Juli 2013
- Juni 2013
- Mai 2013
- April 2013
- März 2013
- Februar 2013
- Jänner 2013
- Dezember 2012
- November 2012
- Oktober 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- Juli 2012
- Juni 2012
- Mai 2012
- April 2012
- März 2012
- Februar 2012
- Jänner 2012
- Dezember 2011
- November 2011
- Oktober 2011
- September 2011
- Juli 2011
- Juni 2011
- Mai 2011
- April 2011
- März 2011
- Februar 2011
- Jänner 2011
- November 2010
- Oktober 2010
- September 2010
- Juli 2010