click 'back' on your browser to to return to our site OR click here for the main menu
Cambridge
CB1
10th June 2006
Mr A Davies,
St. Matthew's Primary School
Norfolk Street
Cambridge CB1 2LD
cc The Baroness Williams of Crosby, David Howarth MP, Alan Johnson MP, David Willetts MP, Sarah Teather MP, BBC Radio Cambridgeshire, the Cambridge Evening News, all school governors
Dear Mr Davies,
W I T H O U T P R E J U D I C E
Thank you for meeting me on Friday to address the worries of parents on the issue of thumbprinting children en masse at St Matthew's school.
Together with other concerned parents, I do not believe that the school is necessarily acting in the best interests of our children, nor are we convinced that it is properly exercising its duty of care by thumbprinting pupils without prior written parental consent.
You claim the scheme has "educational benefits", but have these been quantified outside of the promotional materials provided by Micro Librarian Systems? Please could you point to any independent research that proves thumbprinting has a lasting beneficial effect on learning, as the link would appear tenuous at best. I would also appreciate a clear and precise explanation of the advantages you see over checking books in and out of the library in the normal fashion.
I have had legal advice that, notwithstanding the Information Commissioner's opinion on Data Protection issues, this may be an unjustified, disproportionate and unnecessary invasion of children's right to privacy. The Information Commissioner and others are very clear that legal liability lies with the school in this matter, so I assume that you are seeking independent legal advice.
Could you therefore explain precisely why the school is thumbprinting children? Is this really necessary? With around 400 pupils in the school do you no longer know who your own pupils are to the point where you need to keep data derived from biometric scans on them all? Is mass-thumbprinting without prior written parental consent proportionate in the context of, potentially, a few missing library books? And just how much will this system cost, including staff training, strict security procedures, maintenance, etc? Have the running costs been discussed and approved at a meeting of the governing body? (I assume these will include at least one qualified member of staff in attendance at all times when the system, including keyboards and scanners are not securely locked away to protect the security and integrity of the pupils' data.)
I would like to know how you intend to use the data on the system, and who could have access to it. Could anyone outside St Matthew's access or demand access to any of the data - either that derived from the thumbprint, or the record of what a child has read - e.g. other schools, the police, social services, agents of Micro Librarian Systems?
In the light of my wife's experience, I need convincing that the school (or a library PC) is a secure enough environment in which to hold sensitive data derived from biometric scans. When my wife applied for a police check at St Matthews about two years ago, all her sensitive personal details, National Insurance number, etc (sufficient for a complete identity theft) were left unattended for several weeks on a desk in the main school office, in full view of everyone who passed. Eventually, as the matter did not appear to be progressing, we removed our documents from the school premises without anyone noticing. To this day the matter has never even been queried.
Could you inform me precisely what steps you will be implementing to secure every child's data against unauthorised access at all times, and how you will reliably and verifiably remove data derived from biometrics in respect of pupils whose parents subsequently request this or pupils who leave the school? Will the system be connected to a network and will there be offsite backups of data?
It may well be that some parents decided to participate in the scheme on the basis of your letter sent to all parents dated June 8th in which you categorically stated that the letter I had sent them a day earlier "made a number of false claims about the introduction and use of Junior Librarian in the school". Could you please substantiate this by itemising all the alleged errors in my letter.
Were the governors fully briefed on the degree of controversy surrounding the system, including the fact that a legal challenge had previously been mounted, before they decided to introduce it in the school?
Given that the legal position of the school is in question and the serious concerns of some parents, perhaps you would reconsider your refusal to suspend the implementation of the scheme until these issues - especially consent - have been clarified and our other concerns have been properly addressed?
Do you really consider it "good practice" (to use the Information Commisioner's phrase) to proceed with a course of action affecting the privacy of every child in St Matthews against the wishes of some, and in the ignorance of many, of their parents? What can be the rush, when I assume the school library is operating quite satisfactorily without thumbprinting, and the Junior Librarian system can itself also be fully used without either thumbprinting or cumbersome library cards.
I look forward to our meeting on Monday and to receiving the written reply to my questions, which, at our meeting on Friday, you agreed to provide at your earliest convenience.
Yours Sincerely,