The paper says that calls have been mounted for live facial recognition technology to be halted amid questions over accuracy and privacy. They add that the software - currently being deployed in London, South Wales and Essex - allows officers to scan the faces of passers-by and check them against watchlists:
Several MPs raised concerns about software misidentifying innocent members of the public - particularly Black, Asian and minority ethnic groups. Labour MP Bell Ribeiro-Addy said: "We're veering dangerously close to becoming a police state with levels of surveillance that would only be deemed acceptable in the most autheritarian police states. It's not a matter of 'those with nothing to hide have nothing to fear', it's a matter of our basic privacy."
She pointed to research by campaign group Big Brother Watch which found 89% of facial recognition alerts to date wrongly identified members. Tory Shadow Home Secretary Chris Philp said current software is far more accurate.
Ms Ribeiro-Addy told a Westminster Hall debate: "People of colour are already disproportionately stopped and searched and the use of potentially flawed technology will only increase the rate at which ethnic minorities are stopped, further damaging trust in police in this community."
And she questioned effective it is, stating: "As far as I've been made aware it hasn't produced a substantial number of results. Our constituents are effectively being placed under constant surveillance and the notion of their presumed innocence has effectively been undermined."
MPs heard that vans with the specialist facial scanners are able to scan people in crowds. If they are not on a police watchlist, their biometric data is deleted within half a second.
If they do match, a police officer approaches them and asks them for ID. The technology - which identifies people by measuring dozens of features on their face - has been controversial, with campaign groups demanding it is withdrawn.
Lib Dem Bobby Dean said: "It's clear from the room that there's many, many doubts. We should think about halting the use of this technology until we've cleared up those doubts."
I agree. There needs to be a full review of this technology, how it is used and safeguards put in place before it is redeployed, if it is redeployed at all.
No comments:
Post a Comment
I am happy to address most contributions, even the drunken ones if they are coherent, but I am not going to engage with negative sniping from those who do not have the guts to add their names or a consistent on-line identity to their comments. Such postings will not be published.
Anonymous comments with a constructive contribution to make to the discussion, even if it is critical will continue to be posted. Libellous comments or remarks I think may be libellous will not be published.
I will also not tolerate personation so please do not add comments in the name of real people unless you are that person. If you do not like these rules then start your own blog.
Oh, and if you persist in repeating yourself despite the fact I have addressed your point I may get bored and reject your comment.
The views expressed in comments are those of the poster, not me.