Now this [shite & corrupt] government has revleaned more of its plans for replace the EU-led GDPR, people in the industry have been able to analyse them. And they make for shocking reading.
In summary, the Bill 1) makes it easier for data holders to share/sell information gathered on people (including selling it abroad); 2) harder for people to find out what info is held on them, who it's been shared with, and what it is used for; 3) hands power to the government to make ad hoc amendments when it suits.
From Computing.com (it's subscription so I'll spoiler this):
Spoiler
"The government has made it pretty clear it just wants a free pass," he said.
The government has been vocal about its aim to boost technological innovation, particularly AI, and one way it seeks to do this is by liberalising access to data. In addition, it wants to set the UK up as a global data processing hub, which in practice will also mean reducing restrictions on exporting personal data abroad, in a way that may be incompatible with EU GDPR.
The DPDIB, in its current form, makes it harder for individuals to object to or find out what data business or government agencies hold on them via a subject access request, delli Santi said. The draft Bill lowers the threshold that enables organisations to refuse a request, charge a fee for data access or be required to respond to "vexatious" requests.
...
It also removes the right of citizens to challenge discrimination arising from AI decisions. For example, a biased fraud detection algorithm might result in a person's Universal Credit being stopped, and they would have no recourse to find out why.
Another backward step for personal data rights is that the draft Bill grants much more power to the Secretary of State to decide what data should be shared with government. The government can force private companies and public sector bodies to hand over any data "of general interest" about individual customers, with the government able to change that definition as and when it sees fit.
And the DPDIB neuters the data protection watchdog, giving the Secretary of State the power to dictate priorities to the Information Commissioner's Office.
"The ICO is supposed to be the watchdog about how the government treats our personal data. Of course, giving the government the power to dictate what they can do and what they cannot do is not compatible with this role," delli Santi said.
Pointing out that Norway, which is also outside of the EU, has been reforming its data protection framework "in an exact opposite direction to the UK", delli Santi said the draft Bill would also be bad for businesses that share data overseas. With two sets of rules to comply with, they will be burdened with a whole new set of paperwork, even if the EU does not revoke its adequacy judgement, which is a possibility.
"These reforms show a real illiteracy on the part of the UK government of what data protection is and why it's important," he said.
For a more extensive study:
https://www.openrightsgroup.org/publications/analysis-the-uk-data-protection-and-digital-information-bill/Summary:
The UK Data Protection and Digital Information Bill would weaken legal standards, hinder the exercise of rights, water down accountability requirements, and introduce loopholes in the law. At the same time, Ministerial powers would be unduly expanded, enabling the Government to co-opt the Information Commissioner and bend primary legislation to their likes.
