BBC News Online: 'Snoop' plans put on hold

[Owen Lewis]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ukcrypto-admin@chiark.greenend.org.uk
> [mailto:ukcrypto-admin@chiark.greenend.org.uk]On Behalf Of Ian Brown
> Sent: 19 June 2002 11:20
> To: ukcrypto
> Subject: RE: BBC News Online: 'Snoop' plans put on hold
>
>
> > > Stupid, and dishonest. How dare they take it on themselves to disclose
> > > clearly confidential information without consent or judicial warrant.
> > > Their duty is to their customers, just as a bank's or a doctor's is.
> > >
> > First, banks actually have a duty to report to the government any
> > suspicious transactions.  It's part of the war-on-drugs/money laundering
> > stuff.
>
> I found it amusing/alarming when a major high street bank insisted that I
> transferred a reasonable sum of money between two accounts in chunks of
> ?5,000, presumably to reduce the costs of complying with reporting
> requirements...

I know what you mean. I received a reasonable five figure sum from C&E the
other day and then promptly transferred it out of the company account. I
haven't had such a chatty bank manager call me for ....ooohh a long time :-)

>
> As much as I agree with David's sentiments, remember also that the Health
> and Social Care Act 2001 imposes a duty on NHS and private doctors to hand
> over your medical records without consent when required to under an Order
> from the Secretary of State (eg to cancer registries).

Quite so. And I believe that doctors have long been under a requirement to
report the treatment of any gunshot wound to the police.

The absoluteness of a duty of confidentiality is an interesting area of
exploration. AFAIK, almost all only accept such a duty conditionally. In the
case of one's gossipy neighbour the threshold of confidentiality may be
nominal and in the case of the confessional close to absolute. But actually
absolute??

Owen