Don't think so.
"...my panel and I will continue our ongoing dialogue with NHS England and NHS Improvement"
I'll take that as a no, then.
If the NHS has been fully transparent then what is all the talking about?
The National Data Guardian declined to endorse NHS England's effort to be transparent with its recently published detail on data flows from a patient medical information project that put US spy-tech firm Palantir at the heart of the government's response to the pandemic. The COVID-19 data store was launched in March 2020, and …
Maybe the title 'Guardian' is overselling their capabilities? I don't want data protection authorities to have a dialogue with an organisation that is clearly seeking to hide its activities. It should be a monologue from the regulator telling them that they are going to comply.
Unfortunately, the legislation says that the Guardian "may" give advice and that the relevant care providers should "have regard" to the guidance given.
Also The Secretary of State may remove the Data Guardian from office if satisfied that he or she is unable, unwilling or unfit to perform the functions of the Data Guardian.
The Data Guardian does not appear to have any specific enforcement powers directly over the bodies concerned.
... detail on data flows from a patient medical information project that put US spy-tech firm Palantir at the heart of the government's response ...
UK patient's medical information handled by a US spy-tech firm in cahoots with the government*?
What's there to worry about?
*UK's PM and his band of chummies
Downvote magnet ahoy.
What counts as dissemination?
1) If everything is access via Foundry, and all analytics / reporting take place in that system has there been dissemination of that data?
2) If the data extracted from the system is aggregate figures (the like used in dashboards), has any data held in the system been disseminated?
If the answer to the above 2 are no and no it is very easy for heavy use to be made of the system and have very low reporting of disseminations. More interesting would be how many parties have accessed the system, and what volumes of data have they been looking at.
"the flagship data project is either "largely useless" or NHS England is "dishonest" because it is refusing to tell people about access to the data, Smith said.
"I suspect it is more the latter than the former. That's not a good thing," he told The Register."
I wouldn't be so quick to dismiss the first option
Government has been so underhand and so elusive, about any and all of its attempts to hand over patient data to practically anyone that asks for it, that the only conclusion is that they can not be trusted AT ALL with ANY control of confidential personal patient data.
No doubt there have been several bungs of cash into various govt ministers bank accounts [offshore]
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2022