• Media Enquiries

    07505 448925(24hr)

CCDP : What we know


After another day of confusion around the Government's plans for increased surveillance powers, it now appears there is some back-tracking and the bill will only be a 'draft'. Here's an update of some key points, while Privacy International have highlighted some serious issues with a briefing given to Liberal Democrat MPs. Key issues: The Coalition Agreement pledged: “We will end the storage of

Nine in ten people haven't read Google's new privacy policy


Research published today by Big Brother Watch highlights how only 12% of Google service users have read Google’s new privacy policy. The study, undertaken with YouGov, found while 92% of people online use a Google service on a regular basis, 65% of people were not aware the change comes into effect this week and 47% of people did not know any change was being proposed. This follows the Article 29 Working

The price of privacy : Councils spend half a billion pounds on CCTV in four years


Our latest report highlights the cost to local authorities of their CCTV operations - £515m in the past four years. There are now at least 51,600 CCTV cameras controlled by local authorities, with five councils now operating more than 1,000 cameras. In comparison, £515m would put an extra 4,121 police constables on the streets – the equivalent of Northumbria police’s entire force. The picture varies

Local authority data loss exposed


Big Brother Watch has published a report into the worrying scale of data loss across local authorities. We have uncovered more than 1000 incidents across 132 local authorities, including at least 35 councils who have lost information about children and those in care. Highly confidential information has been treated without the proper care and respect it deserves. At least 244 laptops and portable computers

Press Office

Press Comment: Queen’s speech and surveillance

Posted on by Nick Pickles Posted in Press Office | Leave a comment

Nick Pickles, director of the civil liberties campaign group Big Brother Watch, said: “The Home Office have been very good at saying what the problem is, but seem intent on keeping the technical details of what they are proposing secret. It’s essential that the whole Bill, not just clauses, are subject to rigorous scrutiny.

“Instead of scaremongering, the Home Office should come forward and engage with the debate about how we improve public safety, rather than pursue a policy that will indiscriminately spy on everyone online while the real threats are driven underground and escape surveillance.

“If someone is suspected of plotting an attack the powers already exist to tap their phone, read their email and follow them on the street.

“Given how little detail has been offered is it any wonder that the public are scared by a proposal for online surveillance not seen in any other Western democracy?”

Press Comment: Passenger Name Records

Posted on by Emma Carr Posted in Press Office | Leave a comment

Nick Pickles, director of Big Brother Watch, said : “Yet again the privacy and civil liberties of British and European citizens have been sold out for fear of upsetting the Americans.

“This policy involves handing over our credit card numbers, details on our sex lives, ethnicity and political views, without legal process. Governments are betraying their citizens because a paranoid security complex is running rampant across policy.

“Who is to say that all the extra data the Home Office wants to collect won’t be handed over in years to come too?

“It is far from clear that this policy is not in breach of the EU’s own data protection laws.”

Press Comment: Home Office internet surveillance

Posted on by Nick Pickles Posted in Press Office | 1 Comment

Nick Pickles, director of the Big Brother Watch campaign group, said:
“This is an unprecedented step that will see Britain adopt the same kind
of surveillance seen in China and Iran.

“This is an absolute attack on privacy online and it is far from clear
this will actually improve public safety, while adding  significant
costs to internet businesses.

“If this was such a serious security issue why has the Home Office not
ensured these powers were in place before the Olympics?”

Press comment: Powers of Entry

Posted on by Nick Pickles Posted in Press Office | Leave a comment

Nick Pickles, director of civil liberties and privacy campaign group Big Brother Watch, said: “It is beyond belief that a Conservative Home Office Minister is so blatantly trying launch this issue into the long grass.

“Two years of hand wringing will not change the fact that there are already more than 1,000 laws that give public officials the rights to enter our homes without a warrant. We do not need a consultation to decide that suspecting unregulated hypnotism is going on or extreme comics are being read should not give officials the right to barge into our homes.

“In opposition the Conservatives pledged that apart from the police and emergency services, public bodies would require a magistrates warrant to enter a home. The Home Office may have had a change of ministers, but it seems little else has changed and the general public are left high and dry, at the mercy of an army of pen-pushers who can enter our homes as they please.”

Press Comment: Clare’s law

Posted on by Nick Pickles Posted in Press Office | Leave a comment

Responding tonews that Home Secretary Theresa May is set to reveal that four areas in England and Wales will trial a “Clare’s Law” pilot scheme, that will give women the right to ask police about a partner’s history, Emma Carr, deputy director of privacy and civil liberties campaign group Big Brother Watch, said: “Far more detail is needed on what this will mean in practice. Are the police going to disclose arrests or mere suspicion, despite someone never being convicted? We have a legal system based upon guilt needing to be proven in court and this should not be a means of bypassing that.

“A very clear list of offences that will be disclosed needs to be published to ensure consistency as well as guidance on how the police will assert that enquiries are genuine. Given existing difficulties in ensuring police and other public databases are not misused to infringe the privacy of law abiding citizens, this proposal needs to be very carefully managed or risks being a serious burden on police forces and a threat to civil liberties.”

SOCA takes down RNBExclusive

Posted on by Nick Pickles Posted in Press Office | 2 Comments

Responding to the Serious and Organised Crime agency’s take-down of rnbexclusive.com:

Nick Pickles, director of privacy and civil liberties campaign group Big Brother Watch, said: “I welcome targeted action against websites profiting from infringing content, but the message displayed by SOCA is potentially misleading to the public, along with the threat of putting your internet connection under surveillance.

“It is fair to question whether the involvement of SOCA has diverted resources from investigating serious public threats such as people trafficking, drug importation and gun running and it is laughable to suggest that anyone downloading a few songs from a music blog constitutes organised crime.”

James Firth, CEO of Open Digital Policy Organisation, said: “Artists have a right to get paid and we support action through the UK courts to stop people profiting from the work of others.  Despite the manner in which the site was taken down and the aggressive message displayed it is important to note that there is an on-going criminal investigation and no one has yet been convicted of any offence.

“With reference to the insinuation by SOCA that downloaders may receive 10 years imprisonment for a copyright offence, copyright law is clear. End users cannot be prosecuted under criminal law for what remains a civil matter.  Criminal sanctions under the Copyright Act are limited to distribution offences. “

Three Million CRB Checks in 2011

Posted on by Nick Pickles Posted in Press Office | Leave a comment
  • Registered organisations made 2,981,958 checks in 2011
  • Equivalent to 1 in 17 of adult population being checked
  • 13 of the 25 highest users are private companies
  • 3,924 bodies are now ‘registered’ with the Criminal Records Bureau

The figures, published under Freedom of Information law, have been highlighted by privacy and civil liberties campaign group Big Brother Watch as further evidence that the system has grown out of control.

In 2011 the organisations, which include councils, private background check companies and other businesses, made 2,981,958 checks in 2011. Thirteen of the 25 highest users are private companies.

The data shows how 3,924 bodies are now ‘registered’ with the Criminal Records Bureau and able to submit checks without the signature of the person being checked, prompting fears that the system is being used to pry into people’s privacy.

Nick Pickles, director of Big Brother Watch, said: “For nearly three million people to be checked in just one year is remarkable. It is a sad indictment of a country that has lost all sight of proportion and has substituted a piece of paper for common sense.

“Given just how many organisations now have access to the system, there is a clear risk that it is easy to delve into someone’s private life and run a CRB check without them ever knowing. 

“The checks have already been shown to wrongly brand innocent people as criminals and cost people their jobs for totally unrelated incidents that would not suggest they pose a risk. It’s time to go back the drawing board and fundamentally reform the CRB system.”

Download the full dataset here: http://www.bigbrotherwatch.org.uk/files/CRB2011.xls

Local authorities were among the highest users of the checks, but in vastly different amounts. Essex County Council was the highest user of the checks (21,908) but some councils used the service far less. The Scout Association was one of the highest users with 58,786 checks.

In comparison, the National Fostering Agency made 1613 checks while Manchester City FC made 447 checks.

Any registered organisation can now make CRB checks without requiring an applicant’s signature, prompting fears that the high numbers of checks hides those done without permission of the person being checked.

Third-parties are able to ‘register’ with the Bureau, allowing them to submit bulk applications for the checks. In January 2011 this was suspended because of fears about security and remained suspended until May 2011.

ENDS

The statistics cover the period December 18th 2010 to 18th December 2011.

More information on registered/umbrella organisations:

http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/agencies-public-bodies/crb/partners-reg-bodies/registered-bodies/

 

Press Comment: Lord O’Donnell and the Freedom of Information Act

Posted on by Nick Pickles Posted in Press Office | Leave a comment

Responding to former Cabinet Secretary Lord O’Donnell’s warnings that the Freedom of Information Act has damaged public policy, Nick Pickles, director of civil liberties group Big Brother Watch, said: “Public policy will not be improved by more secrecy and less transparency. If Lord O’Donnell has an issue with the quality of public policy, perhaps he should question those responsible for making it, not the process by which the public can find

“Without the Freedom of Information Act we wouldn’t know about MP’s abuse of expenses, how badly our personal information is protected in the NHS or countless other issues where the public had to fight to find out the truth, against the wishes of establishment officials like Lord O’Donnell.

“Any efforts to undermine, water down or restrict the Freedom of Information Act will be rightly seen as undemocratic and shameless desire to avoid accountability.”

Comment: New EU Data Protection proposals

Posted on by Nick Pickles Posted in Press Office | Leave a comment

Nick Pickles, director of privacy and civil liberties campaign group Big Brother Watch, said: “Current laws protecting our personal information were written before Google existed and an overhaul is long overdue. The proposals published today are a very positive step forward towards better protecting our privacy and giving us all the ability to ensure we retain control of our personal data.

“In a digital age, regulation is required that not only protects our privacy, but also ensures that organisations cannot hide incidents of data loss in both the public and private sector. These proposals are an important part of restoring the balance which means our data cannot be captured without our express permission, and that if we wish to cease using a service we have the right to see all our data deleted.

“It is essential that these proposals are not watered down by those who have already made clear our privacy is not going to stand in the way of their own profits.”

Press release: Local Authority Data Loss

Posted on by Nick Pickles Posted in Press Office | Leave a comment

For release 23 November 2011:

132 local authorities lose sensitive information including details of children in care

New research from privacy and civil liberties campaign group Big Brother Watch has found how, in the past three years, local authorities have seen at least 1035 incidents of data being lost and stolen.

Key findings:

  • 132 authorities involved in 1035 incidents of data loss
  • At least 35 councils lost information about children and those in care
  • The information of at least 3100 children, young people or students was compromised in  118 cases
  • At least 244 laptops and portable computers were lost
  • A minimum of 98 memory sticks and more than 93 mobile devices went missing
  • Of the 1035 incidents, local authorities reported that just 55 were reported to the Information Commissioner’s Office.

Just 9 incidents resulted in termination of employment.

Download the report here.

Despite delivering sensitive services involving children, vulnerable people and those in receipt of various benefits, the research highlights how regularly personal information is lost by local authorities and the huge variation in data protection.

Nick Pickles, director of Big Brother Watch, said: “This research highlights a shockingly lax attitude to protecting confidential information across nearly a third of councils. The fact that only a tiny fraction of staff have been dismissed brings into question how seriously managers take protecting the privacy of their service users and local residents.

“For more than 3,000 children and young people to have their personal information compromised is deeply disturbing, as in most cases parents will not be aware of the incidents. However, equally concerning is that 263 local authorities claim to have not lost a single mobile phone or memory stick, which seems surprising given the scale of loss in other authorities and the private sector.

“As just 55 of these incidents were reported to the Information Commissioner’s Office, there is a clear need for the ICO to have the power to audit organisations without needing their consent to ensure that the ICO is fully aware of data protection breaches.

“Despite having access to increasing amounts of data and being responsible for even more services, local authorities are simply not able to say our personal information is safe with them.”

91% of local authorities responded to the Freedom of Information request, which covered loss of personal information by council employees and contractors between 3 August 2008 and 3 August 2011. However, the group questioned the responses of a number of authorities which reported no incidents suggesting different internal thresholds for reporting meant incidents could be hidden from scrutiny.

The report comes a month after Big Brother Watch’s disclosure that in the NHS more than 800 incidents of confidential patient records being compromised, including details of patients being posted on social networking sites and how medical staff looked at the records of friends and colleagues.

It also follows the Commons Justice Select Committee report that argued courts should have the power to punish people breaching the Data Protection Act with prison sentences, saying fines are an “inadequate” deterrent.

Cases included an unencrypted memory stick containing highly confidential childcare data being lost on a Durham Street, a Kensington and Chelsea council employee losing documents in a pub including name, address, date of birth, health reports, income reports and photographs of service users and scanned case notes belonging to Kent Council being found on Facebook.

They also included a 50 page dossier from Northamptonshire Children and Young People’s Services sent to the wrong parent, a briefcase left in a car park containing caseworker notes of approximately 20 service users, Buckinghamshire County Council revealing 2,000 email addresses in a public mailshot and a North Somerset email account being compromised in a phishing attack.

The top ten worst offending authorities were:

  1. Buckinghamshire (72 incidents)
  2. Kent  (72)
  3. Essex (62)
  4. Northamptonshire (48)
  5. North Yorkshire                (46)
  6. Renfrewshire (41)
  7. West Sussex (36)
  8. Tower Hamlets (31)
  9. Telford and Wrekin (30)
  10. Cornwall (25)

Download the full report here.

Email Address:
  • Facebook

  • Twitter

    • Recent Posts