Through the use of AI, the UK is quickly becoming the snooping capital of the world. That is the grave warning of many civil rights groups. But just how true is this claim?
Whilst the EU is tying itself in knots trying to decide how far to limit the power of facial recognition tools, the UK is set to spend up to £230m providing police with state of the art facial recognition technologies. Indeed, an initial rollout started in 2023 and was used in football matches, concerts and even the King’s coronation.
The government argues that the increase in spending for facial recognition technology is all part of its duty to keep the public safe. Indeed they point to the fact that the use of the technology has helped the police apprehend individuals wanted for serious offences such as rape, robbery and GBH. Consequently it promises to cut down demands on police time. Ensuring that police can become more efficient-a godsend given stretched budgets.
Plans have been sent to police forces across the country highlighting the need for mobile units to scan the faces of passers-by at events and in busy urban areas in the next year.
The eventual hope for this policy, according to the government, is for police to eventually be able to use a single platform to search a range of databases that they don’t currently have access to, including passport images, whilst the Data Protection and Digital Information Bill would open up the driving licence database also. Train stations will also be subject to face scanning if reports are to be believed.
There are many groups who are concerned about these proposed plans however. These include campaigners who are worried that this technology could be used to cause flare ups in minority communities-similar to stop and search-given its invasive and imperfect nature, to those who argue the government’s plans are ill-thought out and rely too much on a flawed technology.
That the government has not sought public buy-in for the scheme further compounds matters. There are fears from privacy and law experts that without properly explaining the consequences of this technology, the government risks alienating the public, further lowering trust in the police and government.
With an election looming, it is possible that the government is simply proposing something that it knows it will never get the chance to implement. However, such short-termism cannot be placed before the general interest of society. More must be done to understand the long term effects of facial recognition technology and the public must be consulted so that they can understand the consequences and have their say.
Vivek Rajkhowa 
Leave a comment