Please see below my letter to Ms McDonagh MP who on Radio 4's TODAY programme at 7.40am sought to defend the actions of Tom Watson (see my correspondence of yesterday to Facebook). I have not recopied my letter to Mr Watson but if anyone wants it please advise.
Dear Ms McDoangh
I trust you are well.
Comments re: Radio 4 Today Programme, Monday 4 March
I am member of the public and not a member of the Labour Party.
I am responding to your comments today, a few minutes ago on Radio 4's 'Today' Programme.
As background I attach at appendix one my letter to Mr Tom Watson in his role as an MP and as Deputy Leader of the Labour Party.
This should be considered as background to the point and questions which I am putting to you and, as a taxpayer and citizen of this country on which I would appreciate a response given the matters of law which I am raising with you.
In your public statements today you discussed what appeared to be to all listeners your support for the position that Mr Watson was both advocating and taking.
This was in the context of all members of the Parliamentary Labour Party being advised by written correspondence by the General Secretary of the Party as to the Party's legal and statutory obligations under Data Protection Law and GDPR.
From your public statement I note that you appeared to be rejecting the clear advice, some may say instruction (the latter would be correct in terms of the statutory responsibilities held by the Labour Party in respect of its position as a 'data controller' under DPA and GDPR.
Questions - Response Required
1. Do you agree that the letter from the LP General Secretary is correct?
2. Do you agree that Mr Watson is not complying with the Statutes and Regulations set out by the GS of the LP?
3. In the alternative can you advise as to why you take a view that members of the LP whose sensitive personal data is being proposed (by Mr Watson and his 'team'), to be monitored and assessed outside of LP Procedure would not have their personal and sensitive data breached by his actions?
4. Can you advise as to why you believe (from your statement today) that Mr Watson and his 'team' are within their rights to intervene in the LP Procedures and regulate, as would be the outcome, the personal and sensitive data of individual members of the LP and possibly others?
5. Can you clarify how, if you believe that Mr Watson and his 'team' have the right to regulate and monitor such data, this complies with the individual rights of the individual data subjects who may be being dealt with under a DPA/GDPR compliant LP procedure and process?
6. In the alternative, can you advise as to how you believe an individual data subject, in the event that they refuse under GDPR/DPA for Mr Watson and his 'team' to have access to their personal data, would be able to bring a complaint to the data controller if they were advised that their data subject rights had been compromised?
7. Can you confirm that as an MP you have to defend and uphold the law?
8. Can you confirm that, as an MP, you have signed up to the Nolan Principles in Public Life?
9. Can you advise, if answering in the affirmative to 7 and 8 above, how your public statements on the Today programme can exist when you are advocating the same position as Mr Watson and his 'team'?
10. If you cannot then can you advise as to why you made such unlawful statements, or, in the alternative, you advocated others to act unlawfully, on the Radio 4 Today programme today?
In your discussion with Mr Humphrey's you referred to ex-Labour MP Joan Ryan who has resigned from the LP but refuses to stand down to establish whether the constituents, who voted for a LP MP and on which she gained a majority as a result of the LPs manifesto of social change and equality. You may be aware, or not, of the Al Jazera documentary when Ms Ryan discussed a range of matters without knowing that she was being filmed. The link is here. I should be grateful for your views on this - particularly as they relate to her alleged misuse of LP personal data of her constituents and others which I understand has been reported to the ICO (and which is my primary focus given the nature of my letter to Mr Watson and yourself in respect of personal data).
I would appreciate a response to this email and my questions submitted under Parliamentary precedent within 48 hours.
Please note that I reserve the right to raise these matters of concern with the LP Governance Unit and the Chief Whip.
Open letter to Siobhain McDonagh re Tom Watson
My response from Ms McDonagh and my reply. I will keep my FB page updated. My complaint to the LP re: Mr Watson's public statements are to be submitted tomorrow (to their Legal anc Compliance Dept).
On Mon, 4 Mar 2019, 15:54 MCDONAGH, Siobhain <email@example.com wrote:
Dear Mr Oley,
Thank you for your email to me.
I do not support any violation of GDPR and Data Protection Law.
My words this morning were instead in support the proactive leadership shown by Tom Watson in recent weeks in fighting anti-Jewish racism in the Labour Party. The apathetic response to a growing trend of disgusting anti-Jewish racism in our Party has been nothing short of shameful and I commend his zero-tolerance approach in rooting out all antisemitism from our Party.
Dear Ms Mcdonagh
Thank you for your response.
I need to advise that it does not respond to my questions. Please can you direct yourself to answering my questions as set out.
I do note that you state that you do not accept that the rights of data subjects under DPA98 as amended and GDPR can be interfered with which is helpful. However you then go on to state that you support Tom Watson in his "zero tolerance" approach to matters of what I assume will be complaints to the labour party.
My letter to Mr Watson and yourself highlights that such a "zero tolerance " approach is unlawful. Hence my still unanswered questions to you.
I am also confused by this latter statement. If you yourself do not support the interference of third parties in the data subject rights of individuals subjected to, in this example, complaints then why do you support another individual in so doing?
Can you clarify as your position is or seems to be 'Janus faced' in that you are holding both positions simultaneously when they are irreconcilable.
I stand to be advised on these matters and the awaited response to my questions.
Open letter to Siobhain McDonagh re Tom Watson
Labour MP STUNS John Humphrys – 'to be anti capitalist you have to be antisemitic'