THE disastrous leak of confidential information about the donors to anti-independence group Scotland in Union escalated into a full-blown crisis for the organisation yesterday.
Donors are said to have been “harassed” after details of their donations contained in a supposedly redacted spreadsheet leaked out on social media. Each one of them is being contacted by Scotland in Union – which is led by former Labour MP Pamela Nash – and the Electoral Commission, the latter being the source of the leak.
READ MORE: Faroe Islands delay their referendum on more independence
The Electoral Commission mistakenly allowed the list to be made public on Wednesday and The National did not publish the names.
We did confirm, however, that 168 individuals and companies had donated around £650,000 to Scotland in Union over the past three years.
The National also reported that friends of Prince William, aristocrats, bankers and landowners were all on the list, to which we can add that a man known to be a personal friend of Prince Charles is also a donor, as is a clan chief. The list was published on social media and last night Scotland in Union stated that donors had been “harassed” as a result.
It also emerged that the Electoral Commission has already reported itself to the Information Commissioner’s Office as the data originated on a computer and was accidentally made public via a website
An Electoral Commission spokesperson said: “On April 25 the commission was notified of a technical issue with the application of redactions in a Freedom of Information resp- onse published on the commission’s website.
“The redaction was ineffective and enabled access to personal information in relation to donations to the Scotland in Union party (sic – they are actually officially a non-party campaign group).
“The commission takes the management of data extremely seriously and regrets this issue. We are taking all reasonable action to minimise any harm caused and to rectify matters where we can.
“We immediately removed the response from our website and are working with Scotland in Union to ensure that the individuals affected are notified.
“The Information Commissioner’s Office has been formally notified of the breach. We are carrying out a full test of our redaction tool to understand how it occurred and will subsequently update internal procedures if required.”
A Scotland in Union spokesperson confirmed its dismay over the leak, saying: “We have still to receive a full explanation from the Electoral Commission as to why they placed private information about our supporters in the public domain and we are consulting our legal team about next steps.
“Unfortunately, we have already had instances of supporters being harassed as a result of the Electoral Commission’s breach.
“This is completely unacceptable.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereLast Updated:
Report this comment Cancel