Biometrics & Surveillance cameras really really need trustworthy governance

Trust thought for today - the use of biometrics and surveillance cameras by police, companies and private individuals is as important and hot a topic for trustworthy and trusted governance as you could wish for.

And yet... under the loose heading of regulatory simplification, the office of the Biometrics and Surveillance Camera Commissioner who provides oversight and has statutory powers is proposed to be merged with the ICO which focuses mainly on data regulation. A 'consultation' is underway, but it looks like the decision has already been taken.

If this is indeed the case, the Commissioner Fraser Sampson feels that this move, and a new code of practice, will not achieve the appropriate oversight and enforcement that the issues, and society, require. And the way the consultation has been framed fails to take the opportunity for a widespread public debate on the important issues and the role of social and ethical considerations which exist quite apart from those about data and privacy.

Here is his rationale for this, in language that even I can understand. He explores the key issues, what the different statutory and regulatory bodies do, considers what is needed and how the proposed governance regime will fail us.

https://lnkd.in/gJ9MKjHv

Hey Stephen Almond what happened to our discussions at WEF on 'trust running like letters through a stick of rock' through regulatory processes!!?? The shortcomings of the intent and process seem to singularly lack adherence to most if not all the 7 Signals of Trustworthiness. Joking apart, love your thoughts.

Good comments in chat

https://www.linkedin.com/posts/hilary-sutcliffe-01235220_trust-thought-for-today-the-use-of-biometrics-activity-6861342323167645696-7wme