Chocgate: The fallout. Partially taxpayer-funded £6k+ staff luxury treats land ICO in lukewarm water
- Reference: 1632828007
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2021/09/28/ico_credit_card_chocs/
- Source link:
The regulator said it was very disappointed in itself after the unnamed staffer racked up a bill of £6,248.40 at Hotel Chocolat in spending £24.60 on 254 gifts for fellow colleagues - and taxpayers footed the bill, because who wouldn’t want to say thanks to the ICO for holding Big Tech’s feet to the fire.
The UK’s data watchdog was tipped off about itself in February by [2]Insider , which spotted the figure in the ICO’s list of [3]corporate charge payments in excess of £500 . The choc-shopping binge reportedly took place on 21 December.
[4]
The ICO said in a [5]statement released yesterday:
An independent internal investigation, commissioned by the ICO in February, confirmed that a single payment of £6248.40 was made on an ICO corporate charged card in December 2020 for identical £24.60 gifts for 254 members of ICO staff.
While the spending was intended to acknowledge the hard work of these staff across a challenging year, the investigation confirmed it was not in line with our staff recognition or spending policies to purchase gifts for staff using public funds.
Around 85 to 90 per cent of the ICO’s annual budget is comprised of the data protection fee paid for by organisations that process personal data, with the remainder coming from an annual grant from the Department of Culture, Media and Sport.
[6]Hotel Chocolat wipes up mess
[7]Choc horror: The UK's Information Commisioner probes its own mammoth £6,248 Hotel Chocolat spend
[8]Security meltdown at Hotel Chocolat
[9]Exercising with chocolate: Festival and tours galore
This Hotel Chocolat shocker was the only transaction made outside of ICO policy, the ICO said, and the only example of pressies being bought for staff. Nevertheless, "for this specific transaction, our strict financial controls were not overseen effectively, enabling the transaction to be made despite it not being permitted by ICO policy."
Sorry is a little word but it takes a big person to say it, and the ICO "want[s] to apologise… we have taken action in response to the investigation’s findings, implementing all recommendations in full, so that this should not happen again."
[10]
[11]
As to which controls had been put in place, the ICO told us: "We have reviewed the Corporate Charge Card Budget Holder approval process and spending limits...
"All budget holders are routinely trained in the use of the corporate charge cards, budget management, as well as our procurement policies; and this mandatory training is now repeated annually."
[12]
In its official statement the watchdog added it would be including a "review of our implementation of the recommendations for this investigation in our future internal audit programme.
“Where the investigation highlighted behaviour that fell below the standards the ICO expects, we have also take appropriate steps,” it added. "Those matters are, however, confidential."
So no choccies for some people this year from the sounds of it?
[13]
Oh and the ICO's hired for a new role: a director of finance to "strengthen the oversight of our financial controls and staff training."
When we asked about this, the regulator told us the "previous director of finance resigned in May. A new temporary director of finance was appointed in June to lead our work in response to the investigation's recommendations."
It added: "A permanent appointment has now also been made to this role and due to join the ICO in October."
We asked whether the ICO would have to pay back the £6,248.49 spent on chocolate gifts for staff last December and were told: "Given that the transaction was not challenged due to some failures in the oversight of our strict financial controls, we have decided that it would not be appropriate to require any individual budget holder to reimburse the funds." ®
Get our [14]Tech Resources
[1] https://www.theregister.com/2021/02/09/ico_hotel_choclat_expense/
[2] https://www.businessinsider.com/uk-ico-spent-thousands-at-hotel-chocolat-2021-2?r=US&IR=T
[3] https://ico.org.uk/media/about-the-ico/documents/2618415/ccc-spending-over-500-2020-21.pdf
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/bootnotes&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2YVM8Uq3z@62NK9U8YYL4pgAAAMY&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[5] https://ico.org.uk/about-the-ico/news-and-events/news-and-blogs/2021/09/statement-in-response-to-use-of-ico-corporate-charge-card/
[6] https://www.theregister.com/2006/11/30/hotel_chocolat_response/
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2021/02/09/ico_hotel_choclat_expense/
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2006/11/29/hotel_chocolat_privacy/
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2015/03/28/chocolate_tours/
[10] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/bootnotes&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44YVM8Uq3z@62NK9U8YYL4pgAAAMY&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[11] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/bootnotes&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33YVM8Uq3z@62NK9U8YYL4pgAAAMY&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[12] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/bootnotes&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44YVM8Uq3z@62NK9U8YYL4pgAAAMY&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[13] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_offbeat/bootnotes&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33YVM8Uq3z@62NK9U8YYL4pgAAAMY&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[14] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
"An independent internal investigation, commissioned by the ICO"
They have to tick all the boxes. In this case, the selection boxes.
Or, as the "independent" investigation was internal, should that be self-selection boxes?
(Paris, because Ms Hilton knows all about hotels and probably quite a bit about chocolate.)
Re: "An independent internal investigation, commissioned by the ICO"
Sadly I read that as lick all the boxes [of chocolates]....
Anyway, glad that I as one of the 1 million businesses that are registered, for at least £40 I recall, helped them enjoy Christmas.
Their website has always sounded threatening, there is a box saying 'Pay your data protection fee' [or else da boyz are comin' round?]
Re: Value?
And an issue that isn't mentioned; preventing staff from getting bonuses is not actually beneficial.
The way almost everywhere works is the carrot and the stick. Carrots follow many forms, financial bonuses for good work or working hard, or even boxes of chocolates. The stick is beating somebody with HR or firing them.
In Government they don't allow you to have carrots because that looks bad in the media, and the stick is wrapped with a meter of feathers by forcing punishments through a byzantine system that makes it impossible to meaningfully discipline people that kill people, let alone those who are just lazy or inept.
With no rewards for good performance and no punishment for bad performance the level of productivity in the civil service is quite a long way below the minimum tolerated in the business world.
Re: Value?
As an ex-civil servant I completely agree.
Quality Counts and Accounts for Everything of Any Great Value
With no rewards for good performance and no punishment for bad performance the level of productivity in the civil service is quite a long way below the minimum tolerated in the business world. ......... Peter2
That's a major crushing performance failing directly attributable to those who are expected and helped to command that which is in full and absolute remote control of them.
However, now the heads of that peculiarly strategic Hydra are all certifiably brain dead. And the gross rot which emanates at/from/to the very top of the traditional conventional hierarchical tree there, is dying to try and spread it around with putrid infections and worthy afflictions further on down throughout its systems, right on down to its very kernels providing prior supporting foundational roots.
Do you wanna mess with ITs Replacement Assets and Universal Virtual Forces ‽ . Take care now ..... Who Dares Win Wins is Definitely Definitively Not Really Just a Greater IntelAIgent Game to Work, REST and Play With/In.
Re: Value?
What's especially annoying is how small the amount of money is. It's the classic "is this actually a big number". If their salaries had all been £25 higher absolutely no-one would have noticed or cared because it's such a miniscule amount compared to even a pretty minimal salary.
This is the kind of shit that makes people leave the public sector.
Demonstrating to tge staff that they are appreciated, probably pays dividends that are worth more than the 6K that the choccies cost.
Spending a little of tax payers cash for Christmas is not remotely like flogging off bits of the NHS or giving multimillion pound contracts to mates who have no history with or knowledge of the purpose of the contract.
Exactly. £25 each for the employees to show a bit of appreciation for their efforts at Christmas is hardly some great scandal. How many rolls of gold wallpaper would it have bought?
Particularly because ICO jobs as a rule pay at least a 1/3 less than an equivalent role elsewhere
I was thinking something along those lines. Our company generally treats the staff pretty well. Easter eggs at Easter, Christmas do at Christmas (with a few drinks paid for), ice-creams on hot days, a few other dos throughout the year... HR has a budget for this kind of thing.
Do ICO not have a budget for general employee well-being? Or is the issue just that this particular company card holder bought said gifts outside of the allotted budget?
"is the issue just that this particular company card holder bought said gifts outside of the allotted budget?"
Well, yeah. If an employee can go off and spend a few grand on something that is obviously not an incidental business expense at the worst possible value and no-one hits the brakes and no-one had to repay the money...what other financial shenanigans could have happened?
That's what I was trying to clarify. I wasn't asking "Someone bought outside the budget, was this an issue?", but "Is the issue that someone bought outside the budget?".
Simply take it out of the executives' Xmas bonus pool.
Sorted.
Chocolates
For a Chocolate Fireguard ?
Did they get approval to spend money on the investigation?
I expect the cost of the investigation and the salary rise of the new finance director will dwarf £6k. If everyone's knickers are in a twist about taxpayer money buying chocolate, how about diverting 1% of the ICO fines to the staff party?
Public sector purchasing 101.
Ticks all the boxes. Overpriced, bloody terrible and there are much better products available for far less money (Hint: Next time, try Thorntons).
Re: Public sector purchasing 101.
Thorntons, blerch...
If you can't get Hersheys, then Cadburys will just about do.
However, if you're feeling fancy, a spoon of palm oil with a pinch of cocoa waved above it is a fine treat!
Hotel Chocolate?
Try:
https://meltchocolates.com
or
https://eponine.co.uk
(No, I don't get commission.)
Value?
"An independent internal investigation, commissioned by the ICO" ... which probably cost significantly more than the chocolate. For even less substance.