Clerk censoring emails

Question

Hello

Our Clerk is censoring emails that are sent to Councillors. Before he forwards them to us, he is deleting the email address of the sender and their phone number. This is for all senders, not just private individuals. Any idea why he would be doing this.

Thanks

Answer 1

It's good practice to do this for emails from members of the public, but not necessary for those from public bodies, businesses, and community organisations, for which such information is in the public domain anyway. For private individuals, some advocate redacting the name of the person too, on the grounds that you can act on the matter without knowing who raised it, so it fails the "need to know" test in data protection legislation.

Comments

Could you share the source of the practice note or guidance from which such action is defined as good practice DtC?  It would be interesting to understand the background and source from which this might be promoted as good practice.

Answer 2

What an absolute nonsensical misapplication of GDPR and waste of tax payer funded salary time.  What’s the betting this is the latest misinformation coming out of SLCC
Your website should contain an appropriate statement in relation to personal details, data management and GDPR as applies to voluntary contact with the council, the clerk or individual Cllrs.
Faced with such a situation (if you are a lone voice) simply publish your Cllr email address / phone number etc far and wide and invite direct contact. If this is a concern shared by more Cllrs, raise a motion for the councils agenda and have the behaviour examined, discussed, amended by resolution of the council.

Comments

What does the ICO recommend? It seems that SLCC and NALC are instructing and empowering clerks to do things and make decision off their own bat that actively prevent councillors from
doing the work requred of them, including building a positive relationship of trust with their residents. This can only happen if members are allowed to properly represent the interests of their whole community, starting at grass roots level by communicating with and reassuring residents who write to the council with their concerns. Is the Clerk the arbitor of all matters rased with the council by the public. Surely councillors are elected to act on behalf of their electorate - ie the taxpayers who voted for them. The Cler is an unelected employee of the council, paid for out of taxpayers' money. The Clerk is not a decion-maker and should not interfere or put barriers in place that obstruct  proper interaction betwen councillors and the public. Why have Clerks suddenly become allpowerful and feel it is their right to dictate to councillors and residents? Clerks are employed to facilitiate council decisions not obstruct them or prevent their progress through normal council business. Of course, there are many good highly trained and professional Clerks who don't adopt control-freak tactics that give them carte-blanche to dictate to councillors, and get away with murder with apparent impunity. I'm  not a councillor any more, but I attend council meetins whee month in month out the Clerk acts as though they are a superanuated councillor joining in discussions without permission and all but voting on resolutions. I sometimes wonder why we bother to have councillors let alone meetings - we might just as well let the Clerk be in charge of making all decisions in isolation. Far less bother all round. And it may well be that this iis what is happening in many small councils around the country. It really is about time member councils of NALC insist that NALC starts acting on behalf of councillors and stops cow-towing to employees of the council.

---

Absolutely!
Rogue clerks emerge where there are weak, lazy, councillors.

Answer 3

Presumably because he thinks it is desirable or necessary under GDPR /1998 data protection act. In reality it is just wasting his and the councils time. The obligation to comply with GDPR and processing of personal data and lies with the entire entity of the Council.  As long as cllrs don't disclose it or  process it for their own purposes there is no reason for the clerk to filter it.

Comments

When I contacted a neighbouring parish recently the clerk checked with me first to ensure I was happy for my personal details, name and email address to be circulated to councillors before doing so.