I am worried by the way that the government is handling the coronavirus crisis.
The crisis itself has clearly been mismanaged. Some still try to dispute it, but it seems very likely that England (but maybe not Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland) will suffer death rates that are aberrational compared to the rest of Europe. I do not think that is by chance.
But I am as worried by the government's massive failure to tell the truth in this crisis. There have been so many examples of this. It's as if the government is not aware that everyone now has their own fact-checkers available to them just about all the time. It's called a phone.
This weekend there was a fiasco when Matthew Hancock claimed there was no lockdown for all over 70-year-olds. Except, of course, that is exactly what the government demanded of all over 70-year-olds, in black and white.
Then there is the testing fiasco, where quite ridiculously the claim was made that 100,000 tests were undertaken on 30 April to save Matt Hancock's face, and yet it was glaringly apparent that this was not true. The figures were crudely rigged to pretend that this had happened. And now the test rate has fallen rapidly. Instead of the actual achievement looking to be a good effort, it now all looks like a farce and the quality of the testing being undertaken is in doubt.
And this matters. As I will note elsewhere this morning, the easing of lockdown is going to be harder than the vast majority of people realised. Testing and tracing is going to be a key part of it. People will have to trust the government can get this right. That was already going to be hard when they have got so much wrong. But a new legal opinion from Matrix Chambers makes the likelihood of people wishing to comply with the government's planned app to assist this process much harder still. The summary of the opinion is as follows:
Legal Advice on Smartphone Contact Tracing Published
- Related Member(s):
- Matthew Ryder QC, Edward Craven
- Related Practice Area(s):
- Media and Information Law, Human Rights
Matthew Ryder QC and Edward Craven from Matrix, along with Ravi Naik solicitor and legal director AWO, a new data rights agency, and Gayatri Sarathy of Blackstone chambers, have been instructed by Open Society Foundation to provide a detailed legal opinion on smartphone contact tracing and other data driven proposals that are part of the Government's response to the Covid-19 pandemic.
Their opinion can be downloaded here.
Its conclusions include the following:
- A de-centralised smartphone contact tracing system — the type contemplated by “DP-3T” and being considered by governments across Europe and also Apple and Google — would be likely to comply with both human rights and data protection laws. In contrast, a centralised smartphone system — which is the current UK Government proposal — is a greater interference with fundamental rights and would require significantly greater justification to be lawful. That justification has not yet been forthcoming.
- The UK Government's announcements in March and April for sharing health data between the private and public sector appear to be flawed. This means such data sharing is potentially not in compliance with legal requirements. Further information needs to be provided to ensure compliance and a data impact assessment should be conducted and made public.
- Any attempt to introduce ‘immunity passports' would be a dramatic measure, both socially and legally. It would need a clear scientific basis and would also have to address the significant impact on fundamental rights including the risk of indirect discrimination.
In summary, there are three issues, as I see them.
First, for reasons that are not clear, but which appear to be entirely related to a) a centralism fetish by the ULK government b) a lack of respect for personal privacy and c) a desire to use this opportunity to collect vastly more data on us to feed into the next round of a Cambridge Analytica style control exercise, the government has rejected the use of the app being created by Google and Apple for this purpose, which respects human rights, and is instead pushing ahead with its own app.
Second, that app is unproven but is unlikely to be anonymised in the way that the Google and Apple apps are. In other words, it transfers data on a person to the government and the Google and Apple apps, as I understand them, instead have the single goal of tackling coronavirus and nothing else, leaving data under the users control.
And third, this leaves the UK government in potential massive breach of data regulations.
An obvious question follows from the three observations, and is what happens if there is a mass refusal to use this app? I have no intention of using it. Put bluntly, I do not want this government to secure data from me that is not needed for the purpose of beating coronavirus. I would join an anonymised app. But not this one.
The risk of such refusal is obvious. That risk is that there could be (and I rather just hope that there will be) mass civil disobedience in the face of this app being introduced. The question is then how the government will react.
Will it instead behave rationally and use the alternative, tried and tested system that so happens will be in use in Europe? Or will it insist that the new app be used and either a) face the system not working, which will impose serious cost on the country or b) have to try to enforce its use by, for example, insisting it be downloaded as a condition of using phones, which would I then think create outright opposition to state control and become a touchstone for the complete breakdown in trust.
I have no idea how this will develop. What I do know is that the trajectory of mistrust, that is entirely self-inflicted by ministers of very limited competence, will continue and that this app might become a focal point for this concern as people refuse to give up control of their data to the government, whatever the crisis.
The government's belief that it has a compliant population may be tested, quite soon. Breaking points are never apparent in advance and I might, of course, have got my judgement on sentiment on this wrong. But it only takes small numbers to be vocal on such issues and change can happen. And to refuse this government our data, whatever the reason for it thinking it wants it, is a wholly rational act necessary act when there can be no logic to it having tracking data of the sort that such an app might supply on our every movement and contact.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
I can see them coercing people to join their app by insisting they take your data before being tested. It’s just like them.
A return by certain age cohorts to schools in June is being tabled. WTF?
There as to be testing regime locally everywhere for that to happen; there has to be PPE!! Even where I work, staff will go out and keep things ticking over but we are light on PPE.
All I am seeing is wishful thinking and/or panic. I can see a second spike coming, no problem.
BTW – can we trust Google and Apple?
Re Google and Apple – the point is that the data has been designed to be anonymised…
I trust that more than HMG’s assurances right now
Re. trusting Google and Apple….
Probably not generally. But I think the point is that their app does it’s data processing locally on each individual’s device before sending anonymised data through, whereas the WM ‘government’s’ proposed app sends the data from each individual’s device through to a centralised data collection point BEFORE processing, and (supposedly) anonymising.
Very dodgy indeed, no transparency, very risky from a data breach point of view, what with all that personal data centralised in one location.
….. and that’s without even mentioning the extremely shady characters and groups that have been given the contracts to produce the WM app, the main one being responsible for the ‘Vote Leave’ campaign, and Johnson’s winning campaign in the last GE. Both of which are widely viewed as the most dishonest, underhanded and misinformation-riddled campaigns to date.
It all stinks. I for one will certainly NOT be using it. Although I wouldn’t put it past that lot to tie a requirement to use it to, say, gaining access to some of their financial ‘support’ packages.
Good points.
The postman brought my New Statesman this morning. You might find this interesting.
It certainly caught my eye……
https://www.newstatesman.com/2020/04/caught-second-wave
Isn’t this the same data protection laws that the named person scheme failed on?
What is the world coming to when Conservative peer Baroness Ros Altman is ‘threatening’ social unrest
https://www.politicshome.com/news/article/former-pensions-minister-warns-of-social-unrest-if-over70s-forced-to-stay-in-coronavirus-lockdown-when-curbs-lifted
I am amused…
I have just started to dip into Shoshana Zubhov’s book on surveillance capitalism and I do not trust any of them!!
Shoshana Zuboff. Brilliant analysis of how we arrived at surveillance capitalism. Her deconstruction of the backdraft from the dot.com boom and bust, is both compelling and convincing.
Everybody should read Shoshana Zuboff, ‘The Age of Surveillance Captialism’; London: Profile Books.
I paid £25 for it last year. I am sure you could find it cheaper; perhaps second-hand. It is sitting at my elbow now.
I have seen it recommended before …. but can I face it in lockdown?
Yes, you can! On the other hand, I have never written so much on the comment section of your blog; and I can’t keep up with you. I am working on my own research, and also write for Bella Caledonia from time to time. I am slso doing my ten minute daily exercise with Joe Wicks for Seniors; excellent and it increases the heart rate, but the really exhausting part of my day in lockdown, is here! Could you perhaps slow your output to a mere blur?
Sorry….
You do have to also realise that this is only a little bit of what I do…
Richard,
I suspect the new British Government Bluetooth linked app., is actually a good example of why it is important that Zuboff’s book is widely read. It is not a matter of what the app.,actually portends, but that the public understand the profoundly powerful nature of the technology now avaialble in personal, mass communications and its potential uses.
I am not trying to sell the wisdom of the proposed Scottish Government app., but it is far more limited, more dependent on information supplied by the user, and on building a localised infrastructure and organisation of testers. It is not a centralised top-down, command and control operation; but follows tried and tested methodologies in infection control; localised, decentralised and adaptable – at least as I now understand it.
https://guardianbookshop.com/the-age-of-surveillance-capitalism-9781781256855.html – £9.56 here
I am getting a copy
Every time I try dry humour ………
Or was that an even drier riposte? Or just weariness?
I just finished reading it this morning!
It is such a well-written book, each page a joy to read.
And then there is the subject matter- facebook and google are not giving away their toys and baubles for free because they are philanthropic, quite the opposite.
You will have to read it for all the details.
Yes, it comes to something when HM Government makes the likes of Google and Apple look good. I will also not use HM Governments app – and what about those who do not have smartphones etc etc?
I heard the developer of DP-3T on Radio 4 this morning and he made sense – especially when it comes to Ireland N & S. It also allows for possibility of travel further afield. Given that this will need to be in place into 2021 at least then a more international approach is required.
I agree that we should not be doing anything that has the potential to be used for other purposes at a later date.
On the issue of the government’s lies I think this is actually pretty interesting. I
would say that the government lies continually – on foreign policy, the Skripal affair, the diplomatic status of Anne Sacoolas, statistics (on any subject) and generally gets away with it due partly to a media which is keen to support the govt line and partly due to the fact that by tomorrow it will be yesterday’s news. The difference here is that (i) this is life and death for all of us and protecting the status quo is no longer the priority and (ii) this news will be tomorrow’s news for a long time. When the government falsely state that PPE is on it’s way from Turkey or give hopelessly inaccurate testing figures at first I thought “how can they be so stupid”. But actually the point is they have spent years lying without repercussions and with the support of the media. The media are no longer playing ball but lying to the citizens is now an established practice and it seems to be a hard habit to break.
As I understand it, the plan is to use Bluetooth proximity to determine who has contacted whom. But that seems to depend on everyone (a) having a Bluetooth enabled device with them at all times and (b) switching Bluetooth on all the time. Most people have smartphones (but many don’t), and I am sure there are many others like me who keep Bluetooth off most of the time. If the government is thinking of hoovering up even more of my data, I just might switch my phone off most of the time, and only turn it on when I need it.
I usually have bluetooth turned off – because I do not use it and it wastes battery
No doubt they are being advised / helped by this bunch.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/may/04/vote-leave-ai-firm-wins-seven-government-contracts-in-18-months
I voluntarily have an app the St Thomas’s is using to map the spread of Coronavirus- I most certainly am not prepared to downlaod a Government designed app and am already feeling nervous about this one.
Having just read The Dark Mirror by Barton Gellman about Snowden revelations Google / Apple version will almost certainly be equally transparent as NSA and GCHQ have got their own back doors to both these companies
All rather worrying….
Those interested in the technical details of the Apple/Google Covid-19 tracking solution can find them here
https://www.wired.com/story/apple-google-bluetooth-contact-tracing-covid-19/
They claim to have addressed the battery drain issues and as the technology doesn’t depend on any location data but instead relies on anonymised proximity data with all the data remaining on the individuals phone it appears to be inherently more secure than the snooping app being developed by our ‘wonderful’ government. I have no doubt that some very clever people will be all over the source code looking for security issues and will publicise widely any flaws detected.
Interesting
I like the fact it is not transmitted centrally
I won’t be installing the UK Government’s coronavirus tracking app either, for the same reasons as you. In my judgement as a software engineer, the centralised design will open the door to all manner of privacy problems.
I read your paragraph about how the UK Government might react to a mass refusal to voluntarily install their app, and had an extra thought about it.
If they refuse to switch to the decentralised app, insist on sticking with theirs and accept that it won’t actually work, I could see them blaming the public for any subsequent jump in death rates after they ease off on the lockdown.
“It’s not our fault the death rates are going through the roof. We’ve done everything we could – we even provided a free app for everyone to use – but people selfishly refuse to install it. You can’t blame us for that. Do you really want us to go for the dictatorship option and force everyone to install it by jailing anyone who refuses?”
The ability to deflect blame in that scenario might actually suit the UK Government more than the mandatory installation option where reporters can say, “Well, we’ve all installed the app, as you’ve forced us to do by law, but the death rates are still rising. Do you accept that your strategy has failed, Minister?”
On the technical aspects of the app, I’ll add this bit from some tweets I wrote the other day:
====
https://twitter.com/NeilImperator/status/1255527879787544580
Now with “voluntary” “opt-in” location tracking:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-52458759
“And it is not clear whether those they had had the contact with would have any choice about being tracked in a way that could end up creating a huge database of the movements of millions of people.”
Basically, the system has to log all your contacts to do its job. If one person opts into having their contact locations logged as well, everyone they have contact with will implicitly have their locations logged when they come into contact with the person who opted in.
The people who didn’t opt in wouldn’t have their locations logged the rest of the time, but that doesn’t help much, because you can infer a scary amount of information from even a partial record, and that partial record could be extracted from the central database at any time.
====
P.S.
The “Notify me of followup comments” box is back, by the way – thank you! I was having the same glitch as Vinnie earlier.
We’re trying…!
(This comment isn’t relevant to the post – please feel free to delete it!)
Don’t worry, I know how hairy a major upgrade can be. I’m currently procrastinating on one at the moment because of all the disability accessibility options I’ll have to reinstate for myself afterward.
The email subscription is working, I just got the notifications for 3 new comments on this post.
I also got a new email asking me to “confirm my request” to be subscribed by clicking on a link, even though the subscription seems to have become active immediately. Would a change in wording to “you can manage your subscription” be better?
I’ll take a look….but we’re kind of weary now
In reply to Neil Ferguson
What I’ve been struck by (but not surprised by) is the appeal to the emotions, acting as a collective and patriotism that is being touted to encourage people to download and use the app. I trust this Govt. not an inch and I will not succumb to their ‘encouragement’ until I can be assured that the data so provided by use of the app does not infringe the rights of myself and others’. I doubt I shall ever be assured.
Is it any coincidence that the app they want to adopt is unlikely to be issued and rolled out until after the date at which it looks like Brexit negotiations are likely to break down in June, following which adherence by the Government to EU data protection laws would become somewhat of a moot point?
No coincidence at all, I suspect….
Iceland developed their own app , anonymised, with great success. I cannot trust UK gov app, devised by Dom Cummings mate from Vote Leave Cambridge Analytica version 2. If forced, the phone would stay at home.
Ref. the use of Bluetooth. As I understand it the part of Bluetooth the app. will use is a low power element which is installed in the ‘phone’s operating system and cannot be turned off. This is unlike the ‘normal’ Bluetooth which one can halt, and which advertises itself with the Bluetooth emblem.
Not good
The answer is no app…
Since any bluetooth based app is based on radio signal strength it can never be accurate. With a range of up to 10m the app is going to recognise contact when there has not been close contact. Going to generate false positives since people on other side of wall or in another vehicle are going register. false positives are going to clog the system.
The only safe way is testing.
Concur totally. Not just false positives, but consequently far too many false additional quarantines.
They’ll have to build in some parameter test on signal strength and length of stay in the vacinity to reduce errors, unless GCHQ or similar has tricks up its sleeves which we are so far unaware of.
Typical difference: while the UK rushes it out for someone to make money from the Government contract, the Germans first of all make the whole idea a subject for discussion in the “Ethics council”, and that concerns a “decentralised” and not a “centralised” implementation. Only after deliberation will they consider whether to implement it, meanwhile all sorts of critical voices are given space on public television. Meantime, they’re testing far more …
The EU’s track and trace solution is likely to prove more acceptable and therefore more successful. Apparently we turned down the offer to be included in this.
“project PEPP-PT, which stands for Pan-European Privacy Protecting Proximity Tracing), seeks to avoid those pitfalls. The plan calls for users to voluntarily download an app which will inform them if they have recently been in the proximity of someone who subsequently tested positive for coronavirus and who also uses the app. That is the extent of the information that will be supplied: You were near someone who was later confirmed to be a carrier of the virus.
The app will not identify who the infected person was nor will it provide information as to when or where exactly the contact took place. Rather than sucking up vast quantities of data, PEPP-PT is intended as a kind of digital measuring stick that warns users if they have come too close to an infected person.”
https://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/fighting-coronavirus-a-new-infection-alarm-system-on-your-smartphone-a-b4b35e3c-6499-4487-a689-6008d8d7ecc8