PRIVACY INTERNATIONAL ANNOUNCES WINNERS OF
THE 6th ANNUAL BIG BROTHER AWARDS
WINNERS INCLUDE MARGARET HODGE MP AND BRITISH GAS.
28th July 2004
EMBARGOED until 7.00 pm, 28th July 2004
On July 28th, the human rights watchdog Privacy
International will present the 6th annual "Big Brother awards" to
name and shame the government and private sector organisations that have done
the most to invade personal privacy in Britain.
The awards will be bestowed at a special event at the London School of
Economics. Awards will also be given to individuals and organisations that have
made an outstanding contribution to the protection of privacy.
Privacy International, a London based civil rights group has for the past 14
years raised awareness around the world about privacy threats ranging from
military surveillance to workplace drug testing (see the PI homepage at
www.privacyinternational.org). Since their inception in 1998, Big Brother
Awards are now held as an annual event in seventeen countries.
Privacy International is engaged in numerous initiatives, including a
comprehensive study of anti-terrorism policy developments worldwide that will
be published in September.
The award night will also see the launch of Privacy International's new
website.
The UK award page is http://www.privacyinternational.org/bigbrother/uk2004/
and the international award page is
at www.bigbrotherawards.org
The gold awards - in the shape of a boot stamping on a human head - will be
presented in five categories: Worst Public Servant; Most Invasive
Company; Most Appalling Project; Most Heinous Government Organisation and
Lifetime Menace (now renamed the "David Blunkett
Lifetime Menace Award").
The winners have been chosen from about three hundred nominees. The number of
nominations for David Blunkett, the Home Office and
the proposed National Identity Card far outweighed all other nominees, but
their unpopularity will not be recognised this year because they have received
awards in previous years.
And the winners are.
WORST PUBLIC SERVANT
Winner: The Rt Hon Margaret Hodge MP, Minister of
State for Children
Margaret Hodge has received numerous nominations because of her
patronage of the controversial tracking provisions in the Children Bill and for
her determination to develop a wide spectrum of intrusive databases and
information systems. Her success in reaching the shortlist reflects the judges
concern stemming from their decision in 2002 to give the Department for
Education & Skills the "Most Heinous Government Organisation"
award for its invasive activities. See http://www.privacyinternational.org/bigbrother/uk2002/
Further information:
http://society.guardian.co.uk/children/story/0,1074,1079140,00.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/08/24/nkid24.xml&sSheet=/portal/2003/08/24/ixportal.html
Runner-up:. Katherine Courtney, Director, Identity Cards Programme, Home
Office, and Stephen Harrison, Head, Identity Card Policy Unit, Home Office
Ms Courtney and Mr Harrison have the honour of being the first-ever
joint nomination for a UK award. They are the largely invisible figures behind the National
Identity Card scheme and have steered the project since its inception in 2002. They
were, of course, just following orders.
See their evidence to the Home Affairs Committee at:
http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm200304/cmselect/cmhaff/uc130-i/uc13001.htm
http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm200304/cmselect/cmhaff/uc130-vii/uc13002.htm
MOST INVASIVE COMPANY
Winner: British Gas
For its unfounded and cowardly claim that the Data Protection Act was
the reason why an elderly couple died after British Gas had disconnected their
gas supply. The hypothermia and absence of any duty of care apparently were
secondary factors.
Further information:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/3342059.stm
Runner-up: Lloyds TSB
For unnecessary and possibly unlawful threats to freeze the accounts of
customers who fail to attend a branch and produce identity documents. The
procedure has been described by the bank as an "initiative" backed by
the Financial Services Authority.
Background information:
http://money.guardian.co.uk/saving/banks/story/0,12410,1173767,00.html
Runner-up: FollowUS
This is one of a growing number of companies specialising in mobile
phone tracking. The company proclaims that its services can be used to locate
people "for peace of mind, security or fun". http://www.followus.co.uk/homeusers.html
Further information:
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,6903,1101683,00.html
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,176-859396,00.html
MOST APPALLING PROJECT
Winner: The NHS National Programme for IT
The NHS won a "Most Heinous Government Organisation" award in
2000 because of its plans to computerise all patient records in a way that is
both insecure and dangerous to patient privacy. Its nomination again this year
reflects the gravity of concerns over these continuing plans.
Further information:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/newspaper/0,,2710-751992,00.html
Runner-up: Vodafone
For systematic default blocking of all "adult" websites. The
measure goes much further than the BT plan to block access to child
pornography, and involves any site regarded as "adult" in nature.
Further information:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3860095.stm
Runner-up: The Safe Harbor Agreement
http://www.export.gov/safeharbor/ This initiative, drawn up by the EU and the US,
provides a basis for the transmission to the US of
personal information on EU citizens. At best the scheme can be described as
inadequate. At worst it is a means of circumventing European privacy law and
fooling people into a belief that their information is being protected within
the US border.
Background information
http://www.computerworld.com/managementtopics/ebusiness/story/0,10801,47152,00.html
MOST HEINOUS GOVERNMENT ORGANISATION
Winner: The Office of National Statistics.
For its development of the "Citizen Information
Project" that will collate and share unprecedented amounts of data on the
entire population. http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cip/default.asp
Further information:
http://www.parliament.the-stationery-office.co.uk/pa/cm200304/cmselect/cmhaff/uc130-vi/uc13002.htm
Runner-up: The Department for Transport
For its electronic vehicle identification (EVI) programme Known
variously as the "Spy in the Dashboard" and "the Informer"
an embedded chip will automatically report to authorities a wide range of offences
including speeding, road tax evasion and illegal parking.
Further information:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2087-790512,00.html
LIFETIME MENACE
Winner: The US VISIT Programme
Privacy International has taken the unusual
step of shortlisting a US
initiative for the UK awards because of the almost total silence in the US over
this programme. US VISIT will fingerprint all visitors to the US from
September of this year. The scheme is offensive and invasive, and has been
undertaken with little or no debate or scrutiny. Nor has the requirement taken
any account of the "special relationship" between the UK and
the US. The UK government has been silent about the programme and has capitulated every step of the way.
http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/interapp/editorial/editorial_0333.xml
Runner-up: The Rt
Hon Charles Clarke MP.
Charles Clarke was shortlisted in 2000
because of his patronage as Home Office Minister of the Regulation of
Investigatory Powers Bill. Now as Secretary of State for Education & Skills
he has responsibility for the Children portfolio occupied by Margaret Hodge
(see nomination above). His activities at Cabinet level pose an ongoing threat
to privacy.
Commenting on the nominations, Simon Davies, Director of Privacy International,
said:
"The winning nominations reflect a broad and intensified assault on the
right to privacy in the UK. There is a clear hostility within government to privacy and a
general antagonism to it from within business. We have seen few instances where
privacy has been genuinely respected by large organisations."
"The default has clearly shifted from privacy to surveillance. Almost all
large government projects attempt to compromise the right to privacy. The
proclaimed need for protection of children and the fight against terrorism has
often been shamelessly used as the pretext for privacy invasion".
"We are seeing a race to the bottom where government and private sector
alike compete to provide the most intrusive services in the most unstable
environment for privacy."
"It has become clear that the European Commission has adopted a key role
in leading the assault on privacy. The UK
government often uses the Commission's decisions and activities as the
justification for privacy invasion. The need for an EU-wide Big Brother Award
is now overwhelming and we will look to this option in the coming year".
"The Data Protection Act has come under sustained and unjustified attack
in the past year. We have some faith that the New Information Commissioner will
more aggressively promote and defend the law".
____________________
Notes to editors:
Simon Davies can be reached on 07958 466 552.
High resolution photographs of the award are available through John Connor
Press Associates on 01273486 851 or on the Privacy International site (lower
resolution)
The 2004 awards were judged by a panel of experts consisting of lawyers,
academics, consultants, journalists and civil rights activists.
The Big Brother Awards have also been staged as an annual event in the United States, France, Austria, Germany, Denmark, Belgium, Spain, Hungary, Bulgaria, the Netherlands, Finland and Switzerland. The UK event will be the 41st Big Brother Award ceremony.
