I read with surprise that the GOC registrar (News, July 1) thinks it is fit to berate the large number of registrants who, knowing we live in a free society, decided not to fill in the GOC demands for insurance and other details which the GOC had absolutely no right to insist on.
I read with surprise that the GOC registrar (News, July 1) thinks it is fit to berate the large number of registrants who, knowing we live in a free society, decided not to fill in the GOC demands for insurance and other details which the GOC had absolutely no right to insist on.
The GOC rule change, which only this month (July, not April 1 as you said last week) has finally come in to place, does allow the GOC to have this information and I suppose all will comply now. However, the GOC in February/March this year put many people's backs up by seemingly pretending they already had the right to such information and demanding it.
If the GOC had been open, honest and truthful by explaining that should the expected legislation pass they would soon be required to have the information, so would people please give it at their March 2005 renewal and it would be kept confidential and destroyed if the legislation fails, then I am sure many more people would have complied.
Mr Coe thinks it is 'ridiculous' that people used their democratic right to privacy by refusing to give private data to which he had no right. I wonder what the Information Commissioner of the Data Protection Commission would think of statutory bodies berating and insulting private individuals who refuse to pass on their private details?
Philip V Mokrysz
Wakefield, West Yorks
The GOC rule change, which only this month (July, not April 1 as you said last week) has finally come in to place, does allow the GOC to have this information and I suppose all will comply now. However, the GOC in February/March this year put many people's backs up by seemingly pretending they already had the right to such information and demanding it.
If the GOC had been open, honest and truthful by explaining that should the expected legislation pass they would soon be required to have the information, so would people please give it at their March 2005 renewal and it would be kept confidential and destroyed if the legislation fails, then I am sure many more people would have complied.
Mr Coe thinks it is 'ridiculous' that people used their democratic right to privacy by refusing to give private data to which he had no right. I wonder what the Information Commissioner of the Data Protection Commission would think of statutory bodies berating and insulting private individuals who refuse to pass on their private details?
Philip V Mokrysz
Wakefield, West Yorks