The Rolls Royce of covert surveillance
The English education and children's services inspectorate Ofsted apparently has "a finely tuned and well lubricated Rolls Royce in the garage, just waiting to be taken out on an appropriate occasion".
But Ofsted isn't moving into the luxury car business - that is just the description given by the Office of Surveillance Commissioners to the capacity of Ofsted to run a secret surveillance operation.
This features in the latest OSC inspection report [2.90Mb PDF] on Ofsted, which has the power to conduct surveillance for its role in monitoring child-minding and day care in England. In the past three years, it only considered getting the Rolls Royce out on one occasion, but decided not to.
The way some public authorities have used their powers for covert monitoring under Ripa (the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act) has stirred up much recent controversy. The question of whether Ofsted should still have this legal right has been raised, but in the inspection report, the Assistant Surveillance Commissioner Colin Kolbert states: "it is greatly to be hoped that OFSTED's efforts will not go to waste because of regrettable recent actions by certain local authorities".
The OSC doesn't always find a well-lubricated Rolls Royce in the garage. I have previously described another of their inspection reports, this time on the Scottish Prison Service, as "the most scathing report I have read of an official inspection into a public authority's work".
These reports were obtained from Ofsted and the Scottish Prison Service by the BBC following freedom of information requests. Such documents cannot be acquired directly from the OSC, since it is not covered by the Freedom of Information Act.
The fact that FOI requesters can ask the inspected authorities for OSC papers, even though they can't ask the OSC itself, doesn't please the Chief Surveillance Commissioner Sir Christopher Rose, as spotted by FoiNews.
In his 2007/8 Annual Report [658Kb PDF], he wrote:
"I regard myself as a 'qualified person' as defined by Section 36 of the Freedom of Information Act and it is my 'reasonable opinion' that for public authorities to disclose the contents of my reports would prejudice the effective conduct of public affairs."
But in his 2008/9 Annual Report [668Kb PDF] released last month, he was forced to acknowledge:
"I misled myself regarding section 36 of the Freedom of Information Act. I am not capable of being a 'qualified person' within the meaning of that Act. I therefore confirm that the decision whether to disclose my reports, and if so in what form, rests with each public authority. I have promised to review the design of my reports to assist public authorities to meet their obligations."
Misleading yourself as to your legal powers: perhaps it's not what you would expect from someone who was previously an appeal court judge.
A 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~12~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
What I found worrying was...
"I have promised to review the design of my reports to assist public authorities to meet their obligations."
That sounds like Sir Humphrey speak for "I'll make sure there's nothing too embarrassing in case you have to release it."
Complain about this comment
Martin,
Could you investigate why the BBC have closed all of Nick Robinsons blog posts to further comment?, personally I think it has to do with the fact that Nik Robinsons blog has two new stories posted by Laura Kuenssberg in which the government is shown to be totally useless.
Could you clear up why the BBC have decided to close his blogs when the articles were only written today?.
Complain about this comment
So which of our thousands of unelected quangos done NOT have secret surveillance powers.......
Complain about this comment
So which of our thousands of unelected quangos do NOT have secret surveillance powers.......
The answer: Virtually all of them have the power.
As predicted the RIPA powers are being abused throughout the country. From local authorities to the potato marketing board we have power crazed quangos thinking they are MI6 arranging for surveillence of all types and certainly not for the promised terrorism offenses only.
I'm not hysterical - just take a look at the requests they have made. These organisations think they are MI6 with their new "secret agents". We now have blacked out vans parked outside private residences filled with surveillence equipment watching lest someone let their dog poop on the pavement.
It's a ridiculous, oppresive and over the top police-state behaviour by thousands of elected and unelected quangos.
Complain about this comment
We removed our child from a failing school. When they had an Ofstead inspection a year later I contacted them and asked how my views could be included, they said I didn't have a child at the school so my views wouldn't be listened to, when I pointed out that over 30 other families had done the same thing within the last term Ofstead still wern't interested.
There is absolutly no way for parents to have any input into an Ofstead inspection if they have the sense to remove their child from a failing school.
Complain about this comment
We have reached a point in Western democracies where the people are seen as the problem. The ruling technocrats actually believe that technology provides information that is harmful in the hands of the public. With so much information being gathered, for many questionable rationales and expanded authorities, it is hard to defend so best not to look. Governments act in their own interest and that interest is less in line with public interest as time goes on. It seems like all those early fears about technology being used to infringe on personal privacy have all turned out to be true. I would think, that when one has to ask for the right information to receive anything, it would make you wonder about what you don't know more than what you do. Just think what Joe Stalin or Mao could have done in the modern age. When you die, at least your family can receive comfort in knowing that somewhere the government will have your digital file, gone but not forgotten will have real meaning.
Complain about this comment
Whatever happened to that man that set all this in motion, the one who got out before the s--- hit the fan?
Tony Blair will be the UK's official candidate for EU president, Baroness Kinnock has apparently confirmed.
The post will only be created if the Lisbon Treaty is ratified by all EU states - Ireland is to hold a second referendum in October.
I feel sick.
Complain about this comment
Martin:
Yes, I was glad that the approriate authorities investigated the Rolls Royce case and found it didn't break any laws....
=Dennis Junior=
Complain about this comment
I know a child minder. She's the mother of two sons, one graduated with a first class honours degree, the second has recently completed a Masters degree at Edinburgh where he was one of only seven selected on the course (The tutor was apparently allowed to select up to fifteen, but only seven made the grade). Both are brilliant musicians, the younger a self taught pianist, his Masters dealing with composition and applications to film scores etc. As a child minder she has various inspections, and is graded accordingly. She has never been other than top graded, but it's mainly to do with paper work and record keeping, and has little to do with actually looking after children. Political correctness is seen as far more important than the childs welfare. She isn't a teacher yet is expected to educate the children in her charge. She has to make sure the house is spotlessly clean, the children cannot be left to drink alone, they cannot be left for one moment without a fresh beaker of juice or water.. (How many parents are compelled to do such things?). Her status as a childminder is high amongst her peers and OFSTED, they approach her to take in on a temporary basis children whose mothers maybe that morning appearing in court, or the local rehab etc. The time before last the OFSTED inspector came round with her clipboard,it turns out she wasn't herself a mother, hadn't really any life experiences other than university and her job.. She wanted to see dolls that had specticles(!)- She wanted to see development records, showing she's made notes how her charges had learnt things (Again, how many parents are compelled to do this?). 'I want to show you something' and took her to the wall where she has displayed the graduation photos of her two sons, 'I think I know a thing or two about bringing up children, don't you?' The OFSTED inspector didn't know what to say at first but said something rather revealing 'I know some of the things we require (and it changes each year incidently) seem silly, but I HAVE TO JUSTIFY MY POSITION'.. So people, it has little to do with ensuring kids are safe, it's principly to do with pen pushers justifying their positions. Surveliance can manifest itself in many ways, it isn't just cctv's, or bugs, it's the very fabric that we call normality..'It's for your safety' How many times have we heard that?
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS