Commenting.


COMMENTING
Due to the move of the blog to Wordpress posts from Jan 2012 onward will have commenting disabled (when I remember to do it)
Cheers - AE

Wednesday, 13 July 2011

Known to the police

With all the other stuff going on, carbon taxes here and tabloid phone not-really-hacking there, it's easy to forget that other things are going on. Good job Nanny Knows Best blogged this because even though I ranted about it last month it had slipped my mind.
Nanny, possibly relieved at the avalanche of data being spewed forth about the Murdoch empire's "moral lapses", recently and rather quietly launched "The Police National Database".

Another day, another database!

This particular database will hold the records up to 6 million apparently innocent people, including every victim of sexual assault and domestic violence.

[...]

Jennie Cronin, a director at the National Police Improvement Agency (NPIA), the body in charge of the database, estimated that the records of between 10 and 15 million people would be held (that's between 16% to 24% of the entire population).

Given that approximately 9.2 million people in the UK have criminal records, that leaves up to almost 6 million on the database who are we assume innocent.
NKB save the best 'til last.
Approximately 12,000 approved police officers and staff will be able to access the database.

Would these be of the same quality and high ethical standards as those who allegedly sold information and contact details of all and sundry (including the Queen) to News International?
Bullseye! And since some of those six million will have very pressing reasons for wanting their information to never, ever get out - more pressing than most of the rest of us, I mean - it should be a pretty big concern that all this data is sitting there in one place, just waiting for the wrong person to offer the right cop the right incentive. I'd hope that the vast majority would be above that but even if the number of incorruptible officers with access was 99.9% of the total that still leaves a dozen who'll take the money.

Now, hands up who believes that 12,000 with access won't become 20,000 within a couple of years and fifty thousand within a decade. Anyone? No?

Funny that.

Comments (3)

Loading... Logging you in...
  • Logged in as
Isn't this dangerous for another reason? i.e. Predatory officers could scan the database for vulnerable local women or people to hurt? I'm sure there will be lots of safeguards against this (there always is) but if there are more than a few cases of people using CCTV cameras to spy on women in bathrooms and such then imagine how much more invasive this data could be.

Yes, this kind of thing is dangerous - and for sexual assault/DV victims many will want to keep the information secret for the reason that people who are mistreated in this way often have it happen throughout their lives due to abusive people finding out about it.
1 reply · active less than 1 minute ago
That's true as well. Again, unlikely, but still a good reason for the control of data to be in the hands of the person who its about rather than millions upon millions just being chucked in the database.
More likely is that CSOs (because they probably will get access to it) will use it to spread local gossip, I'd imagine. Some people think they have the right to know about the medical illnesses of all and sundry but such folk rarely wish to broadcast their own failures to the world.

But, yes, I get your general point. I suppose it depends on how much you'd trust people in your local pub with random private affairs about your life.

I readily await seeing this database at a Tube station... :|

Post a new comment

Comments by

Related Posts with Thumbnails