Parental consent now a legal requirement in UK

In May 2012 the Protection of Freedoms Act was given Royal Assent and passed into law in the UK.  Chapter 2 of the Act, clauses 26-28, deals with consent when processing a child's biometric data:

Chapter 2 Protection of biometric information of children in schools etc.
26. Requirement to notify and obtain consent before processing biometric information
27 Exceptions and further provision about consent and notification
28. Interpretation

The salient points of the Act are: 

• Each parent of the child should be notified by the relevant authority that they are planning to process their child's biometrics and notified that they are able to object.  
• In order for a school to process children's biometrics at least one parent must consent and no parent has withdrawn consent. This needs to be in writing.
• The child can object to the processing of their biometrics regardless of parents consent.
• The child is under 18 years old.

The requirement for parental consent as defined in this Act becomes enforceable In September 2013.

The UK is the first country in the world to address the issues of informing parents and requiring their consent when their children’s biometrics are being taken, stored and processed by a school or any such institution.

Further scrutiny will be needed to see how enforceable this law is and how 'informed' parental consent is.  Informed consent is a complex issue.  If the biometric vendor, as the sole supplier of information via the school to the parent, is the sole source of information that the school gives to the parent, fully informed consent could be questionable.

It is interesting to note that not one academic, educationalist, industry developer have given their support for children using biometrics, in fact many experts have have voiced their concerns.  Only biometric vendors and schools seems to think biometrics use without parental consent with children is acceptable.  I know whose advice I'd take.

It's a good job that if parents Google "Biometrics in Schools" then this blog appears on Google's first results page.  Parents should also check out the Leave them Kids Alone website.

Freedom Bill

Thursday 13 January 2011 - Children Fingerprinting

Question - Asked by Lord Taylor of Warwick (Lords Hansard text from 13th Jan 2011)

To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they will end the compulsory fingerprinting of children at school without parental permission.[HL5389]

The Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Schools (Lord Hill of Oareford): The Government intend to introduce legislation in the Freedom Bill to ensure that no children's biometric data are taken in schools or colleges without parental permission.

Hansard Link here: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201011/ldhansrd/text/110113w0001.htm#11011367000056

Biometric industry see BECTA's guidance as a "green light"

Apparently industry welcomes "the findings of BECTA’s new report entitled Guidance on Biometrics in Schools , which highlighted the positive role biometric technology can play in reducing bullying, theft, truancy and costs in schools."

Really? Reducing bullying, theft and costs? There is no evidence to support this in the public domain.

One biometric vendor states “BECTA’s report effectively provides the green light to continue the roll out of Biometric solutions in schools. The report makes a clear statement that fingerprints cannot be recreated from the string of numbers stored in the database..."

So whilst parents, human rights groups and concerned Members of Parliament are not happy about the BECTA guidance the industry have taken it as a "green light". The parent consultation touched on in the document is simply NOT happening and the notion that BECTA, the DCSF (DfES) and Labour Education Dept hold on to that fingerprints cannot be reconstructed is simply incorrect.

What are we actually paying these people for?

A simple Google of "reconstructing fingerprints" bring up papers that have been written on this or blogs (moi, listed no.3!) that can point civil servants and politicians in the general direction on this subject. It's not rocket science.

It is apparent that there is a concerning lack of research in BECTA's "guidance" which appears to have unsubstantiated claims and inaccurate statements in. Is it right for this to be the basis of an industry that is able to legally take biometric data from children as young a 4 without consulting parents?

The people that this report should have advantaged - our children in schools.

The people this reports advantages - biometric companies supplying to schools.

Where is the guidance?

Well maybe I'm being tough, it's only 1 day late.

For any of you that want to search BECTA's website for the guidance that has been long promised by the Government due out end March 2007, then put back to May 4th until after the local elections (because biometric technology and it's little known, unregulated, haphazard use with children in schools mostly without parents knowledge, is presumably a big enough "bat" for opposition to use to affect voters decisions?), just type the below in to Google:

site:http://www.becta.org.uk biometric - here's Google's result for this,

or

site:http://www.becta.org.uk fingerprint - and this search result here.

Lots of 'products' listed but no guidance for teachers on this yet... if anyone finds any please let me know!

Regulation deadline has not been met by Government for millions of children's biometrics held on school PC's

Both the Liberal Democrats and Conservatives are vocalising their serious concerns about using biometric fingerprint scanners in schools (see blog side bar of parliamentary questions asked), and experts such as Kim Cameron express worries about this practise.

Even BECTA recognises the "concerns of parents" and internationally Roderick Woo, Justice of the Peace at the Hong Kong Office of the Privacy Commissioner, states about the use of biometrics in schools:

"I considered the consent of the staff and pupils rather dubious, because primary school's consent in law cannot be valid and there's undue influence. If the school says, 'give up your fingerprint', there's no way of negotiating.

"Also it's not a good way to teach our children how to give privacy rights the consideration they deserve,"

The Irish Data Commissiors Office has this guidance issued and warns schools about the danger of legal action, "claim for damages from a student", if they don't implement a detailed Privacy Impact Assessment.

There are laws in the USA regulating this technology and children.

But when schools send letters like this school in Doncaster did to parents, and another example over on Tarique Naseem's blog something is radically wrong.

What is going on when we parents have to sign slips for our child's image to be taken but yet when it comes to their bodily biometric data lying on a school PC - no consent, no even letting us know, no nothing!

Why, when ALL the above people and more are expressing serious concerns with fingerprinting children in schools, is the government not moving on the promised guidelines,as stated from 10 Downing Street , it said it would issue at the end of March?

Best Practice?

On 9th February this year another advisory statement was issued by the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) telling schools how to erase children's biometric data from school computers by using professional data cleansing companies, quoted here in the last paragraph of this article:

"...under the data protection act schools must also dispose of the data using professional data cleansing companies once the child has left or if it no longer of use."

Why isn't there a concise page advising schools on how to handle children's biometrics on the ICO's website after 6 years of biometric technology in schools?

Granted the ICO is now working with BECTA and the DfES to issue guidelines, to put on BECTA's website, so the above 'data cleansing' advice will presumably be in the guidelines.

Currently LEA's, schools, governors and parents have dribs and drabs fed by ICO's spokespersons to various media outlets for them to deem what the 'best practice' in schools is with regards to biometric fingerprint technology.

In the recent case of a school scrapping a biometrics, children's biometric data was on the school computer system for over a year unused before it was deleted, and probably when the school did destroy the biometric records they didn't use a data cleansing company - but how would they to know what to do?

"The thumbprint system has not been used for more than a year...and the numerical records of the thumbprints were destroyed last week."