Education is a devolved matter, and this response outlines the information for England only.

The decision to use biometric technology rests entirely with individual schools and colleges, who must ensure that the use of biometric data complies with all relevant legislation. The department does provide guidance, which makes it clear that schools must comply with the law when implementing biometric technologies, including the Data Protection Act 2018, UK General Data Protection Regulation and the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.

In July 2022, the department published a revised version of the guidance, ‘Protection of biometric data of children in schools and colleges’, to provide support on the use of automated biometric recognition systems.

Whilst the department has not held discussions with the Information Commissioner’s Office on the schools in North Ayrshire Council, the department has engaged with the Information Commissioner’s Office on the department’s updated guidance.

Education is a devolved matter, and this response outlines the information for England only.

The decision to use biometric technology rests entirely with individual schools and colleges, who must ensure that the use of biometric data complies with all relevant legislation. The department does provide guidance, which makes it clear that schools must comply with the law when implementing biometric technologies, including the Data Protection Act 2018, UK General Data Protection Regulation and the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.

In July 2022, the department published a revised version of the guidance, ‘Protection of biometric data of children in schools and colleges’, to provide support on the use of automated biometric recognition systems.

Whilst the department has not held discussions with the Information Commissioner’s Office on the schools in North Ayrshire Council, the department has engaged with the Information Commissioner’s Office on the department’s updated guidance.

The Government have extensive legislation in relation to the individual’s rights for their own data, particularly highly sensitive data such as biometric data. The Government have been clear that live facial recognition technology is not appropriate in schools and colleges.

There is already a regulator. The Information Commissioner’s Office regulates this area and, if the noble Lord would let me respond, the key statutory functions of the Biometrics Commissioner are explicitly to keep under review the retention and use of DNA and fingerprints by the police.

My Lords, the decision to use biometric technology rests entirely with individual schools, which must ensure that the use of biometric data complies with all relevant legislation. We provide guidance, making clear that schools must comply with the law when implementing biometric technologies, including the Data Protection Act, the UK GDPR and the Protection of Freedoms Act.

The decision to use biometric technology rests entirely with individual schools and colleges. Schools and colleges are legally responsible, as per the UK General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Protection of Freedoms Act and Data Protection Act for any data they gather and use.

However, in the department there is a team of three officials who work on a range of policy areas relating to health and safety in schools. They also have, as part of their work, responsibility for the provision of guidance for schools and colleges linked to these areas. This includes, amongst others, the non-statutory ‘protection of biometric information of children in schools and colleges’ guidance, which is available here: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/692116/Protection_of_Biometric_Information.pdf.

The department published the current version of this guidance to support schools and colleges in 2018. It replaced the ‘protection of children’s biometric information in schools’ guidance from 2012. The department has also publicly committed to updating the 2018 version of the guidance to reflect changes in legislation, replacing the Data Protection Act 1998 with the Data Protection Act 2018 and UK GDPR.

The department has not had any meetings with private companies to discuss the use of biometric technologies in schools in the last five years. This is because schools and colleges have the autonomy to choose whether to use biometric technology and, if so, to select the most appropriate provider. However, the department does work closely with others from across government, including the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, the Home Office and the Information Commissioner’s Office on this issue.

Whilst the office of the Biometrics and Surveillance Camera Commissioner has no statutory regulatory function in the oversight of automated biometric technology used in schools, the department has met with the Commissioner’s Office officials recently to explain the purpose of the department’s guidance and will continue to engage with them as appropriate going forward.

The decision to use biometric technology rests entirely with individual schools and colleges. Schools and colleges are legally responsible, as per the UK General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Protection of Freedoms Act and Data Protection Act for any data they gather and use.

However, in the department there is a team of three officials who work on a range of policy areas relating to health and safety in schools. They also have, as part of their work, responsibility for the provision of guidance for schools and colleges linked to these areas. This includes, amongst others, the non-statutory ‘protection of biometric information of children in schools and colleges’ guidance, which is available here: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/692116/Protection_of_Biometric_Information.pdf.

The department published the current version of this guidance to support schools and colleges in 2018. It replaced the ‘protection of children’s biometric information in schools’ guidance from 2012. The department has also publicly committed to updating the 2018 version of the guidance to reflect changes in legislation, replacing the Data Protection Act 1998 with the Data Protection Act 2018 and UK GDPR.

The department has not had any meetings with private companies to discuss the use of biometric technologies in schools in the last five years. This is because schools and colleges have the autonomy to choose whether to use biometric technology and, if so, to select the most appropriate provider. However, the department does work closely with others from across government, including the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, the Home Office and the Information Commissioner’s Office on this issue.

Whilst the office of the Biometrics and Surveillance Camera Commissioner has no statutory regulatory function in the oversight of automated biometric technology used in schools, the department has met with the Commissioner’s Office officials recently to explain the purpose of the department’s guidance and will continue to engage with them as appropriate going forward.

The decision to use biometric technology rests entirely with individual schools and colleges. Schools and colleges are legally responsible, as per the UK General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Protection of Freedoms Act and Data Protection Act for any data they gather and use.

However, in the department there is a team of three officials who work on a range of policy areas relating to health and safety in schools. They also have, as part of their work, responsibility for the provision of guidance for schools and colleges linked to these areas. This includes, amongst others, the non-statutory ‘protection of biometric information of children in schools and colleges’ guidance, which is available here: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/692116/Protection_of_Biometric_Information.pdf.

The department published the current version of this guidance to support schools and colleges in 2018. It replaced the ‘protection of children’s biometric information in schools’ guidance from 2012. The department has also publicly committed to updating the 2018 version of the guidance to reflect changes in legislation, replacing the Data Protection Act 1998 with the Data Protection Act 2018 and UK GDPR.

The department has not had any meetings with private companies to discuss the use of biometric technologies in schools in the last five years. This is because schools and colleges have the autonomy to choose whether to use biometric technology and, if so, to select the most appropriate provider. However, the department does work closely with others from across government, including the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, the Home Office and the Information Commissioner’s Office on this issue.

Whilst the office of the Biometrics and Surveillance Camera Commissioner has no statutory regulatory function in the oversight of automated biometric technology used in schools, the department has met with the Commissioner’s Office officials recently to explain the purpose of the department’s guidance and will continue to engage with them as appropriate going forward.

The decision to use biometric technology rests entirely with individual schools and colleges. Schools and colleges are legally responsible, as per the UK General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), Protection of Freedoms Act and Data Protection Act for any data they gather and use.

However, in the department there is a team of three officials who work on a range of policy areas relating to health and safety in schools. They also have, as part of their work, responsibility for the provision of guidance for schools and colleges linked to these areas. This includes, amongst others, the non-statutory ‘protection of biometric information of children in schools and colleges’ guidance, which is available here: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/692116/Protection_of_Biometric_Information.pdf.

The department published the current version of this guidance to support schools and colleges in 2018. It replaced the ‘protection of children’s biometric information in schools’ guidance from 2012. The department has also publicly committed to updating the 2018 version of the guidance to reflect changes in legislation, replacing the Data Protection Act 1998 with the Data Protection Act 2018 and UK GDPR.

The department has not had any meetings with private companies to discuss the use of biometric technologies in schools in the last five years. This is because schools and colleges have the autonomy to choose whether to use biometric technology and, if so, to select the most appropriate provider. However, the department does work closely with others from across government, including the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport, the Home Office and the Information Commissioner’s Office on this issue.

Whilst the office of the Biometrics and Surveillance Camera Commissioner has no statutory regulatory function in the oversight of automated biometric technology used in schools, the department has met with the Commissioner’s Office officials recently to explain the purpose of the department’s guidance and will continue to engage with them as appropriate going forward.

The department has not undertaken any assessment of the use of facial recognition and other biometric technologies in schools or their interoperability with other government agencies.

Any decision to use an automated biometric system should be taken after careful consideration by the headteacher and governors, and after appropriate consultation with pupils and parents. If they choose to do so, they must comply with all relevant legislation set out in the Data Protection Act 2018, UK General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.

The department has not undertaken any assessment of the use of facial recognition and other biometric technologies in schools or their interoperability with other government agencies.

Any decision to use an automated biometric system should be taken after careful consideration by the headteacher and governors, and after appropriate consultation with pupils and parents. If they choose to do so, they must comply with all relevant legislation set out in the Data Protection Act 2018, UK General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012.

Between 01 January 2017 and 14 February 2020, 5.3 million images have been uploaded to the Police National Database (PND).

Information on the number of images deleted from the PND since 2017 is not retrievable centrally.

As at 14 February 2020 the total number of images stored on the PND is 20.9 million. This figure includes duplicates, images of marks, scars, tattoos and some low quality images. Not all of these are visible to or searchable by users.

Between 01 January 2017 and 14 February 2020, 5.3 million images have been uploaded to the Police National Database (PND).

Information on the number of images deleted from the PND since 2017 is not retrievable centrally.

As at 14 February 2020 the total number of images stored on the PND is 20.9 million. This figure includes duplicates, images of marks, scars, tattoos and some low quality images. Not all of these are visible to or searchable by users.

Between 01 January 2017 and 14 February 2020, 5.3 million images have been uploaded to the Police National Database (PND).

Information on the number of images deleted from the PND since 2017 is not retrievable centrally.

As at 14 February 2020 the total number of images stored on the PND is 20.9 million. This figure includes duplicates, images of marks, scars, tattoos and some low quality images. Not all of these are visible to or searchable by users.

We understand that the EU have been considering a proposal for a moratorium, but no final decisions have been taken. There are no plans to impose a moratorium in the UK, but we will continue to keep the legal framework under review.

The government is committed to empowering the police to safely use new technologies such as automatic facial recognition within a strict legal framework. The government welcomes constructive proposals for improvements to the framework, while noting that the Information Commissioner conducted an investigation last year under the existing regime.

Over the last 4 years (2016 to date), Border Force have installed 124 ePassport gates at costs in the region of £9.75m with ongoing support/service costs in the region of £5.3m

A direct comparison of queue times before and after ePassport Gates installation is not an accurate assessment of improvement given the number of variables involved, including but not limited to increasing number of biometric passports in circulation, changes to the cohorts of passengers able to use the gates, delays to flight schedules and increased number of travellers to the UK.

Recent and previous performance against passenger wait time Service Level Agreements can be found in Border Force Transparency data available at:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/border-force-transparency-data

Border Force is committed to ensuring passengers arriving in the UK receive an excellent service. ePassport gates are an efficient means of border clearance for eligible passenger cohorts and allow us to conduct a full range of security checks.

ePassport Gates are part of the long-term vision for the border, making better use of digital technology and greater automation to improve the passenger experience, whilst maintaining security.

There are 264 e-Passport Gates now operational at 23 air and rail terminals including Paris Gare du Nord and Brussels Gare du Mid, and e-Passport Gates usage continues to increase, linked to the increase availability of e-Passports. e-Passport gate usage has increased from 1 Million in 2009 to 61.3 Million for the 12 months to the end of November of 2019

Protecting the UK border is, and always has been, of paramount importance to this Government. It has never been government practice, for reasons of national security, to comment on operational issues relating to border security.

This includes offering commentary on the performance of border systems and of ePassport Gates specifically

It is a matter for the San Francisco City Board of Supervisors whether its agencies should use facial recognition technology, and it is right to debate the use of new technologies in democratic societies.

Live Facial Recognition (LFR) has the potential to play an important role in tackling crime, and the police here have commissioned independent reviews of its effectiveness. The police have broad common law powers to prevent and detect crime, which allows them to use surveillance cameras and LFR in public places for policing purposes.

However, these powers must be exercised in accordance with the law including the Police and Criminal Evidence Act, Human Rights Act, Data Protection Act and having regard to the Surveillance Camera Code of Practice. Possible matches produced by LFR systems are always checked by a human operator before deciding what, if any, action to take.