Wednesday 16 November 2011

Brodie Clark's evidence 2

In the opinion of this blog:
For 10 years the Home Office have been investing public money unwisely in projects which depend for their success on mass consumer biometrics technology being reliable – it isn't.
Brodie Clark gave evidence yesterday to the Home Affairs Committee. According to Public Servant magazine's report he said:
"The warnings index had not been compromised at Heathrow ... it must never be compromised. There are nine checks, the fingerprint check is the least reliable, it is a secondary and additional check to the face against document match. The policy required me to suspend watch list checking, the manager at Heathrow decided to suspend the lower level of checking and I approved."

Brodie Clark's evidence 2

In the opinion of this blog:
For 10 years the Home Office have been investing public money unwisely in projects which depend for their success on mass consumer biometrics technology being reliable – it isn't.
Brodie Clark gave evidence yesterday to the Home Affairs Committee. According to Public Servant magazine's report he said:
"The warnings index had not been compromised at Heathrow ... it must never be compromised. There are nine checks, the fingerprint check is the least reliable, it is a secondary and additional check to the face against document match. The policy required me to suspend watch list checking, the manager at Heathrow decided to suspend the lower level of checking and I approved."

GreenInk 2 – bringing the Home Office's use of biometrics under statistical control

Unpublished:
From: David Moss
Sent: 15 November 2011 17:54
To: 'letters@thetimes.co.uk'
Subject: Jenny Booth and Philippe Naughton, 15 November 2011, Theresa May ‘destroyed my reputation’

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/article3227351.ece

Sir

In the matter of Brodie Clark, the public learn for the first time that "fingerprint matching ... was the lowest level of nine identity checks".

Ministers have given the impression for ten years since 9/11 that these biometrics are reliable. No statistics have ever been published to support this impression. There are no such statistics.

We have also learnt through the UK Statistics Authority that the Home Office have been misusing statistics, not for the first time, to improve the impression of their performance.

The UK Statistics Authority's stance in this matter is exemplary. I recommend that they should also be given the chance to review the statistics available on the biometrics used by the Home Office. If this technology turns out to be too unreliable, then the projects which rely on it should be discontinued to avoid any further waste of public money.

Yours
David Moss

GreenInk 2 – bringing the Home Office's use of biometrics under statistical control

Unpublished:
From: David Moss
Sent: 15 November 2011 17:54
To: 'letters@thetimes.co.uk'
Subject: Jenny Booth and Philippe Naughton, 15 November 2011, Theresa May ‘destroyed my reputation’

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/uk/article3227351.ece

Sir

In the matter of Brodie Clark, the public learn for the first time that "fingerprint matching ... was the lowest level of nine identity checks".

Ministers have given the impression for ten years since 9/11 that these biometrics are reliable. No statistics have ever been published to support this impression. There are no such statistics.

We have also learnt through the UK Statistics Authority that the Home Office have been misusing statistics, not for the first time, to improve the impression of their performance.

The UK Statistics Authority's stance in this matter is exemplary. I recommend that they should also be given the chance to review the statistics available on the biometrics used by the Home Office. If this technology turns out to be too unreliable, then the projects which rely on it should be discontinued to avoid any further waste of public money.

Yours
David Moss

GreenInk 1 – an alternative target for DfID's billions

Unpublished:
From: David Moss
Sent: 13 November 2011 12:55
To: 'dtletters@telegraph.co.uk'
Subject: UKBA and DfID

Sir

While the UK Border Agency are clearly short of money, the Department for International Development are said to be concerned at how hard it is to find worthy causes to spend their our money on. If we re-classify the activities of UKBA as international development, perhaps ...

Yours
David Moss

GreenInk 1 – an alternative target for DfID's billions

Unpublished:
From: David Moss
Sent: 13 November 2011 12:55
To: 'dtletters@telegraph.co.uk'
Subject: UKBA and DfID

Sir

While the UK Border Agency are clearly short of money, the Department for International Development are said to be concerned at how hard it is to find worthy causes to spend their our money on. If we re-classify the activities of UKBA as international development, perhaps ...

Yours
David Moss

Ed Davey, problem-solver – midata

In 1621, King James I directed the Privy Council to establish a temporary committee to investigate the causes of a decline in trade and consequent financial difficulties. The Board's formal title remains The Lords of the Committee of Privy Council appointed for the consideration of all matters relating to Trade and Foreign Plantations.
That's what it says on Wikipedia, under Board of Trade.

400 years later and not a foreign plantation in sight, this temporary committee is thriving and we still have a President of the Board of Trade – Vince Cable, Secretary of State at BIS, the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills.

What with him ruling by divine right (James, not Vince), it's unlikely that James would have seen the need for a team of no less than five ministers of state, but that's what Vince has got, plus Ed Davey, Lib Dem MP for Kingston and Surbiton, minister for employment relations, consumer and postal affairs.

And thank goodness for Ed Davey with his PPE from Oxford and his masters in economics from the LSE because, 400 years later, here we are again with a decline in trade and consequent financial difficulties. But not for long. Mr Davey has the answer.

What's stopping the economy from growing? Businesses can't sell enough goods and services. Why can't they sell enough goods and services? Because they don't know which consumers want which goods and services. It's the consumers' fault*. Who's in charge of consumers? Ed Davey.

The right man for the job, Mr Davey proposes that consumers should collect together all their transactional history and circulate it to businesses, who can process the data and work out exactly what to sell us. Job done, economy starts growing again and never stops. Why didn't you think of that?

That's the economics sorted out. But Mr Davey is a politician as well. He needs to sort out the politics. A small but loud-mouthed minority of the generally grateful population gets a bit tetchy about protecting its privacy and guarding its dignity. What to do?

Master of more than just economics, Mr Davey comes up with a name for his scheme, "midata". My data – see what he's done, there? The security and comfort of exclusive possession all wrapped up in a friendly name, you will note, with no capital letters in it. And he's come up with two USPs. People will be "empowered" by midata because they will take "control" of their data.

That's why the BIS press release, Government, business and consumer groups commit to midata vision of consumer empowerment, uses the word "empower" and its cognates no less than 13 times. Poor old "control" only makes one appearance, but it's a starring one:
Today’s announcement marks the first time globally there has been such a Government-backed initiative to empower individuals with so much control over the use of their own data.
Who would be empowered for the first time globally by midata? Surely the businesses using it to target customers. Who would be in so much control of the data? Surely the businesses who are processing it.

Is it possible that Mr Davey has perhaps got the empowerment and control wrongly ascribed? That is the question posed by a number of contributors to his blog. Four of us. There can be only one interpretation of the silence with which Mr Davey has greeted these impertinent enquiries – diplomat to his fingertips that he is, he doesn't want to embarrass us.

Diplomacy is one thing, but don't mistake it for weakness. Mr Davey is a determined man and midata will not be derailed:
Government slams operators for failing to sign up to Midata hub
Government officials have slammed mobile operators for not signing up to its data hub project Midata ...

Consumer affairs minister Edward Davey had wanted all the operators to sign up to the voluntary scheme to ‘further assist consumers in getting the best deal on their mobile phone contract’ ...

One senior aide at the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills said: ‘Instead of supporting the Government’s vision of endorsing the key principle that data should be released back to consumers, all of the UK’s main operators have shunned the proposals and are delaying signing up. It’s great we have Three on board, but the fact is we need all of the firms involved to really be credible ...

... the BIS aide added: ‘Consumers should be able to access, retrieve and store their data securely and mobile operators should not think themselves immune from this.’
"Voluntary", you see, another Ed Davey-inspired USP, as heralded in the press release:
midata is a voluntary partnership between the UK Government, businesses, consumer groups, regulators and trade bodies to create an agreed, common approach to empowering individuals with their personal data.
But it's "voluntary" in a sense that only ministers and Whitehall officials understand the word. No-one else, on turning down the opportunity to join an organisation voluntarily, would expect to be "slammed" for it.

How long before the woolly mitten comes off revealing the petulant fist inside, and we read:
Government slams consumers for failing to sign up to Midata hub
Government officials have slammed a small group of recalcitrant and mentally unstable subversives for not signing up to its data hub project Midata ...

Consumer affairs minister Edward Davey had wanted all patriotic citizens to sign up to the voluntary scheme to ‘further assist the economy’ ...

One senior aide at the Department for Business, Innovation and Skills said: ‘Instead of supporting the Government’s vision of endorsing the key principle that personal data should be available to us, a few unwise souls have shunned the proposals and are delaying signing up. It’s great we have Stephen Fry on board, but the fact is we need everyone in the UK to really be credible ...

... the BIS aide added: ‘The government should be able to access, retrieve and store personal data securely and consumers should not think themselves immune from this.’
You think you're "immune"? Why?

King James, your Majesty, your gracious bequest glows still in the hearts of these, your humble subjects.

----------
* This seems to be something of a Lib Dem tic. Remember that, according to Chris Huhne, it's our own fault, we consumers, that we pay so much for energy.

Ed Davey, problem-solver – midata

In 1621, King James I directed the Privy Council to establish a temporary committee to investigate the causes of a decline in trade and consequent financial difficulties. The Board's formal title remains The Lords of the Committee of Privy Council appointed for the consideration of all matters relating to Trade and Foreign Plantations.
That's what it says on Wikipedia, under Board of Trade.

400 years later and not a foreign plantation in sight, this temporary committee is thriving and we still have a President of the Board of Trade – Vince Cable, Secretary of State at BIS, the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills.

What with him ruling by divine right (James, not Vince), it's unlikely that James would have seen the need for a team of no less than five ministers of state, but that's what Vince has got, plus Ed Davey, Lib Dem MP for Kingston and Surbiton, minister for employment relations, consumer and postal affairs.

And thank goodness for Ed Davey with his PPE from Oxford and his masters in economics from the LSE because, 400 years later, here we are again with a decline in trade and consequent financial difficulties. But not for long. Mr Davey has the answer.

Tuesday 15 November 2011

Whitehall waste – official statistics

From today's BBC News website:
Home Office drug seizure figures were 'highly selective'
The UK Border Agency has been "highly selective" in its use of drugs seizure figures, the chair of the UK Statistics Authority has said.

Sir Michael Scholar has written to the Home Office to seek reassurances that figures were not released to generate positive news coverage.

He said if this was the case it would be "highly corrosive and damaging" ...
Sir Michael is Chairman of the UK Statistics Authority. He is a Good Thing.

This isn't the first time he's taken the Home Office to task over its tendentious use of statistics. Public Servant magazine carried this article back in March 2009:
Statistics show this watchdog is prepared to bare its teeth
...
Government departments – notably the Home Office – are having to learn some painful lessons on the use and misuse of statistics. The Home Office has found itself in hot water a couple of times – for its fact sheet on knife crime statistics in December, and for tacking a press release on "tough border controls" onto ONS data on population figures last August.
From the same article:
Concern about declining public trust in government in general – and official statistics in particular – led ministers, with all-party support, to set up an independent watchdog in the UK Statistics Authority [chaired by Sir Michael Scholar], with a tough new code of practice for all public bodies producing any kind of official figures ...

“One of the reasons I took this job is that having good statistics is like having clean water and clean air. It’s the fundamental material that we depend on for an honest political debate”, [says Sir Michael] ...

One innovation is a national statistics publication hub website, on which all the new statistical releases are posted every day. “For the first time it completely separates the statistics from comment on them ...

The new rule that data cannot be released to the media or ministers more than 24 hours before publication is also having an effect ...

Does what is perceived as the selective release of the most favourable figures into friendly ears contribute to public distrust?

“I think it does,” Sir Michael replies. “I personally think it’s a form of corruption” ...

“… what should happen is that political debate takes place on the basis of a clean set of statistics, produced without political interference by professionals who have a clear set of values as regards the integrity, objectivity and impartiality of what they are doing” ...
Someone approached the UK Statistics Authority a few years ago and asked if they could take a look at the statistics associated with the Home Office's ID cards scheme. These statistics are so unimpressive that the project should not be allowed to proceed, said someone.

No, said the UK Statistics Authority, we can only intervene where there are official statistics. The statistics the Home Office are relying on are not official. So we can't comment.

That is one of the many problems with project management in Whitehall. That is one reason why so much public money is wasted by Whitehall. That is why someone suggested to the Home Office that they should submit themselves to the discipline of the UK Statistics Authority, see below. And that is very possibly why the Home Office have never answered that point:
I suggest that the way to overcome that scepticism is to place the matter in the hands of the Office of National Statistics. The use of mass consumer biometrics in public services, I suggest, should be based on official statistics. If rigorous academic evaluation suggests that mass consumer biometrics have a part to play, well and good. If not, then don't let's waste our time and money on them.
----------
22 November 2011 – one week later, the Guardian catch up:  In praise of … Sir Michael Scholar

Whitehall waste – official statistics

From today's BBC News website:
Home Office drug seizure figures were 'highly selective'
The UK Border Agency has been "highly selective" in its use of drugs seizure figures, the chair of the UK Statistics Authority has said.

Sir Michael Scholar has written to the Home Office to seek reassurances that figures were not released to generate positive news coverage.

He said if this was the case it would be "highly corrosive and damaging" ...
Sir Michael is Chairman of the UK Statistics Authority. He is a Good Thing.