UK Parliamentary Committee Calls For The End Of Facial Recognition Tech By The UK Government

from the excellent-points-that-will-almost-certainly-be-ignored dept

The UK government already has the cameras -- thousands of them. So, why not add facial recognition to the mix? A number of UK law enforcement agencies already have. UK police forces compiled a legally-questionable database of 18 million face photos and went to work.

Nobody did well. Failure after failure followed the rollout, with the London Metro police repeatedly claiming the "worst of the worst" title for itself. Despite this resounding lack of success, the Home Office feels the UK needs more failure, not less.

As if further indication was needed of Britain's slide into a surveillance state, Home Secretary Sajid Javid has backed highly flawed police trials of facial recognition cameras.

Speaking at the launch of tools to be used to combat online child abuse, he said it was right for forces to "be on top of the latest technology".

"I back the police in looking at technology and trialling it," he told the BBC. Javid added that "different types of facial recognition technology is being trialled especially by the Met at the moment and I think it's right they look at that."

Is it though? Is it "right" to be subjecting UK citizens to faulty hardware and software for the sole reason of… I don't know… feeling like you're staying on top of technological developments? Take a look at that last word. The tech is still developing. Right now, it's abysmal. It may improve, but allowing the construction of massive databases and turning the nation's residents into lab rats isn't the answer.

You know who thinks this rollout of facial recognition tech is a bad idea? Awkwardly enough, it's the UK government. A report [PDF] by the government's Science and Technology Committee says the tech is faulty, it's being deployed with virtually no oversight, and the government it reports to refuses to believe there's a problem.

From the summary of the Committee's report:

We reiterate our recommendation from our 2018 Report that automatic facial recognition should not be deployed until concerns over the technology’s effectiveness and potential bias have been fully resolved. We call on the Government to issue a moratorium on the current use of facial recognition technology and no further trials should take place until a legislative framework has been introduced and guidance on trial protocols, and an oversight and evaluation system, has been established.

It's not like there's no existing model the government could use to craft its own policies. The Scottish government has already engaged in public consultation and has published an impact assessment on biometric collections and surveillance. The English government has done nothing. It has promised to "review" the tech's rollout but, to date, hasn't moved forward with any meaningful examination of the issues raised by the deployment of automatic facial recognition. The Home Office thinks a seven-year-old law -- the Protections of Freedoms Act -- covers all the bases. The Committee rather harshly sets the record straight:

The Government’s 27-page biometrics strategy was not worth the five-year wait. Arguably it is not a ‘strategy’ at all: it lacks a coherent, forward looking vision and fails to address the legislative vacuum that the Home Office has allowed to emerge around new biometrics. Ultimately, it represents a missed opportunity for the Government to set out a principles-based approach for the use and oversight of second generation biometrics. Simply establishing an oversight board, with no legal powers, is not good enough given the highly intrusive nature of the technologies. Further, the development and use of biometric technologies must be transparent and involve as much public awareness and engagement as possible, to ensure that there is public trust in the technologies. Unfortunately, public engagement has been sorely missing from the Home Office’s approach to date. Its ongoing ‘consultation’ on the governance of biometrics has no published terms of reference and there is no obvious way for interested parties to participate. This is not good enough.

The Home Office continues to believe the nothing it's doing is good enough. It has repeatedly defended the tech and brushed off the concerns of numerous entities about the lack of legal framework or public discussion, along with its documented failure rate.

To make matters worse, UK law enforcement agencies continue to ignore guidance on retention of facial images it has collected over the past few years. There are now 23 million images sitting in police databases. Those not needed by law enforcement are supposed to be deleted after six years. This isn't happening. Instead, agencies are acting as though they can hang onto all photos in their databases indefinitely. The Committee says this is not only the government again ignoring its obligations, but this failure possibly violates the law.

Since the Committee published its Report in 2018, progress has stalled on ensuring that the custody images of unconvicted individuals are weeded and deleted. It is unclear whether police forces are unaware of the requirement to review custody images every six years, or if they are simply ‘struggling to comply’. What is clear, however, is that they have not been afforded any earmarked resources to assist with the manual review and weeding process. The Minister previously promised improvements to IT systems that would have facilitated automatic deletion. Such improvements now appear to have been delayed indefinitely. As such, the burden remains on individuals to know that they have the right to request deletion of their image. As we stated in 2018, this approach is unacceptable and we agree with the Biometrics Commissioner that its lawfulness requires further assessment.

The Home Office is onboard with "further assessment." It just wants to take it as its own leisurely pace and discard any input from citizens or experts it doesn't like. As long as the government is free to ignore its own advisory committees, it will continue to subject citizens to faulty tech that contains the potential to wrongly deprive them of their freedom.

Filed Under: facial recognition, police, surveillance, uk, uk parliament


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 23 Jul 2019 @ 5:27am

    Common sense even for totalitarians

    Really even given the most evil of intents facial recognition just plain isn't ready for a scale beyond maybe unlocking your device (which has its own security and legal flaws).

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 23 Jul 2019 @ 5:28am

    Overseas trips

    Has the Science and Technology Committee been visiting San Franscisco?

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 23 Jul 2019 @ 6:29am

    They say they are not going to use it, but why should anyone believe anything they say? It's not like they are credible.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    dadtaxi, 23 Jul 2019 @ 6:37am

    It's not so much that there is facial recognition tech, but that the use of it needs to be very carefully considered, defined and regulated

    https://metro.co.uk/2019/05/16/moment-man-fined-90-hiding-face-police-facial-recognition-cameras-95 71463/

    It's not so much that this man was fined for disorderly conduct once having been stopped. Its the fact that when he refused to take part - that on its own seems to have given police enough reasonable suspicion to stop him in the first place.

    Legal groups should have been jumping all over this

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 23 Jul 2019 @ 8:10am

    the UK isn't anywhere near the country it was, prior to the begining of this century. it used to not just appear to believe in democracy, in freedom and privacy, it actually openly stated what it meant to have these things in existence in a country, while also openly condemning countries that had none of these beliefs. look at it now! as far as the things mentioned above, it is one of the worst countries there is that still supposedly believes in them but is one of the worst for upholding them! the worse it gets, the closer to the likes of China etc it gets, but dont worry. it isn't the only one of these countries. the USA, N.Zealand and Australia are all competing for the title of 'Hypocritical Country of the double decade'! only Canada seems to respect citizens still, although even that is starting to flail. it can only mean that everywhere in the world is the same. countries run be those who want everything their positions can give while screwing the people, treating them/us like slaves simp0ly because they dont want us to know what two-faced, lying, cheating fuckers they are while they want to know all there is to know about us. that means their escapades can be closed down while we can be locked up! if that is a democratic world, i dread to think what an undemocratic one would be like!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 23 Jul 2019 @ 8:22am

    world gone mad.

    i'm taking odds on whether competent facial recognition tech or self-driving cars that are really useful will come first. one, i say, on the twelfth of never and the other when the rivers all run dry.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 23 Jul 2019 @ 10:30am

    The thing is, the documented failure rates are not just caused by the tech, but by basic math.

    If in a sample of millions of faces there are a few criminals, any non-zero error rate will produce more false than true positives, simply because there are millions of opportunities to produce false positives for every true one.

    And since a perfect zero error rate is physically impossible, no amount of development is going to change that.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Personanongrata, 23 Jul 2019 @ 12:16pm

    It all Makes Perfect Sense Expressed in Dollars and Cents*

    The Home Office continues to believe the nothing it's doing is good enough. It has repeatedly defended the tech and brushed off the concerns of numerous entities about the lack of legal framework or public discussion, along with its documented failure rate.

    It doesn't matter if the tech works or not.

    It is a matter of profit.

    Fear sells.

    Can't you see, It all makes perfect sense, Expressed in dollars and cents, Pounds, shillings and pence ~ Roger Waters, Perfect Sense Part II *

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KcwZihEpu3A

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Close

Add A Reply

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here



Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter




Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Special Affiliate Offer

Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.