An honourable man

Like many others, I chose to opt out of the NHS scheme to harvest my private medical data and sell it on to interested parties use it to identify poor care. If I trusted the NHS with my data it might have been a different story, however knowing the mission creep which happens in public bodies along with the NHS's recent history with 'clerical errors' I do not believe for one second my data is safe with them.
Still it comes as a surprise that two GP's (one remains anonymous) have decided that they too do not trust the NHS with their patients details.
Mail.

A rebel GP faces having his practice shut down after vowing to opt all of his patients out of a flagship NHS scheme to harvest their medical records.
Under the scheme, private medical information will automatically be extracted from patients’ records unless they opt out.
But there are growing concerns over the data collection project, with critics saying the public has not been properly informed about it.
And yesterday it emerged that Health Service bosses threatened to shut down Dr Gordon Gancz’s GP surgery because he pledged to keep his patients’ details off the database.
Dr Gancz, who has been at his Oxford practice for almost 40 years, accused the NHS of using ‘blatant bullying’ tactics to ‘bulldoze’ doctors and patients into complying with the scheme.
The GP told how he was sent a ‘threatening’ email warning him that he would be ‘in breach of his contract’ if he did not automatically opt his patients in to the scheme.
He said it also contained the ‘Big Brother-ish’ demand that he remove a statement on his surgery’s website which warned patients that he was ‘concerned’ about the scheme and told them: ‘We have decided to assume that all our patients wish to opt out of this data extraction.’

It's interesting that the NHS believes it has a right to such data and that they've chosen to go on the offensive over a doctor choosing to opt out his entire practice. Again and again we have learned that public bodies such as the DVLA  have on occasion sold details to private companies about those who use their system. Simply put, public services and institutions are like many private companies lax with their customers private details in that they see no problem with selling it to those who make an offer for it.
Now whilst the NHS will only use your date of birth and NHS number to identify the people on the database there are ways and means to get around this and sooner or later you just know that your area will be targeted by someone using the database as a statistically relevant fund of knowledge to sell you health aids. I did notice when I turned 50 that the sheer amount of junk mail selling me stuff for pensions and funerals went through the roof along with adverts for prestige motoring the insurer for over 50's.
Put it this way, if it's out there sooner or later the NHS will be tempted to sell it on and it will come back to bite you.
The record speaks for itself...

Failing targets?

It's interesting to see how public bodies such as the police, education and health meet targets, They could (and occasionally do) argue that such targets are unrealistic, but mostly they come up with ways to circumvent them... which is also known as lying.
Express.

HOSPITAL patients are waiting three weeks longer than records show, a report has revealed.
NHS targets require that 90 per cent of patients who need to be admitted to hospital start treatment within 18 weeks of referral by their GP.
This rises to 95 cent for those who can be treated as outpatients.
But research by the National Audit Office found NHS trusts in England were “mis-recording” data.

That's pretty much what some police forces were doing with crime data and similar to what educationists in government and schools did with exam results, they went ever higher whilst churning out 1 in 5 kids who did not understand reading or writing in any meaningful way.
Still, it does go to show the mindset of those who work in a target driven environment, if you can't meet the target, invent or misrepresent the results to make it appear as if you did. That's essentially what the previous Labour administration did for society (amongst other things) they wanted good results and to hell with what was actually going on, a mantle taken and ran with by the current administration, or rather those working for them.
For too long now the political process has worked on the 'make it so' principle of judging results by the paperwork, rather than what's actually going on. That's why we had ever higher exam pass rates, low crime numbers and now low waiting times. It gave ministers something to crow about and the likes of the BBC would never call them on it nor come to that the rest of the MSM unless it was a scandal they couldn't cover up.
They say we get the government we deserve, if that's the case what a seriously moronic nation we must be.

Does this include the right to remove them?

The ever intrusive state that Labour have built to control us took a new twist yesterday.

BBC.

People will be given the right to petition for CCTV cameras, Labour has pledged, as the party unveils its plans for communities and law and order.

Home Secretary Alan Johnson was joined at a press conference by Katie Piper, who was the victim of an acid attack.
She said her attackers may not have been caught and brought to justice if it had not been for the use of CCTV.
Mr Johnson also said Britain was "not broken", and violent crime had fallen, contrary to Conservative claims.
Mr Johnson accused opposition parties of opposing greater use of CCTV cameras on the basis of it forming part of a "surveillance society".

Now Katie Piper was lucky, the CCTV cameras actually caught her attackers, however in the vast majority of cases they don't even work properly, or are looking in the wrong direction or even used for matters not to do with personal safety (putting rubbish in the wrong bins, parking offences etc) Indeed according to Detective Chief Inspector Mick Neville, who heads the Metropolitan Police's Visual Images, Identifications and Detections Office (Viido), billions of pounds have been spent with almost no results to show. Only three percent of crimes have been solved using CCTV footage, and offenders aren't afraid of being caught on video. Det. Chief Inspector Neville, speaking to The Guardian, described the system as an "utter fiasco" and that "no thought" had gone into implementation.
So of course Labour want more, because people think they are safer (they aren't) and it's a vote winner, at least until the cameras are used to spy on the very people who want them. And I can almost bet that once they are in, there will be no right to remove them.
We're sleepwalking into a "1984" style regime and instead of fighting it every step of the way people are asking for it when they aren't just ignoring it. Wherever there's opposition the government moves to neutralise it or demonise it, there are times I get so tired of warning my friends and being looked at as if I'm mad, "Done nothing wrong, got nothing to fear" is usually the response I get, though slowly but surely it's becoming more obvious the levels of state intrusion and the things it supports.
Still it's a fight worth the effort and I still believe we can win, though I'm coming more and more to suspect it will be a Romanian style revolution rather than a political renaissance of the body politic.

Trust has to be earned

I got a letter today from Medway NHS about the Summary Care Record which is a secure electronic summary of crucial health information which could make a major difference to my care if I'm unable to tell NHS staff the details myself.

I suspect they will fool a lot of people into opting into it by default, as opting out requires downloading a form and taking it along to your local GP (by June 10th 2010)  telling them not to bother putting you on it.

Personally I'll be opting out for the simple reason I don't trust the government and by proxy the NHS with my personal data either from abuse or simply just leaving it for anyone to find on a bus, train, taxi or landfill site.

Telegraph. 2007 figures

A record 37 million items of personal data went missing last year, new research reveals.
Most of the data was lost by government officials but councils, NHS trusts, banks, insurance companies and chain stores also mislaid or published personal information about staff or members of the public.
Many losses were caused through CDs going missing in the post, laptop thefts, and inadequate security systems that failed to stop hackers reading information stored on computers.
The details lost included those of names, addresses, passports, bank and mortgage accounts, credit cards, hospital records, dates of birth, national insurance numbers, driving licences and telephone numbers.

Data Loss Examples in 2008:

NHS: The NHS lost a lot of data in 2008, with a selection of examples below:

• 9 NHS trust admit losing millions of records.
• 4 out of 5 NHS trusts lose medical records
• List of NHS losses produced by the Freedom of Information Act (its a long article!)
• 45,000 medical records lost
• 21,000 medical records lost
• The NHS also moved a lot of records out to other company  with 300 million medical records moved out of the NHS and the patients data being shared with council 

Sooner or later you'll all get a letter like this, it's up to you as to whether or not you trust them, personally I don't and I'd reccomend you don't give them the data either.

And what's with the having to download the opt out form? Some people don't have internet access still. Sounds like a con to make sure we all sign up regardless.

Trust has to be earned, quite frankly they can't be trusted if past efforts are anything to go on.