ContactPoint 1562184 218264726 2008-06-09T21:44:17Z Kozuch 1339567 clean up + reference formating fixes using [[Project:AutoWikiBrowser|AWB]] '''ContactPoint''' (with the previous working title of '''Information Sharing Index''' (or '''IS Index''' or '''ISI'''); also the '''Children's Index''') is a planned [[government database]] that will hold information on all children under 18 in [[England]], designed by [[Capgemini]]. The proposals were made in response to the [[child abuse|abuse]] and death of eight-year-old [[murder of Victoria Climbié|Victoria Climbié]] in 2000 in England – in which it was found that various agencies involved in her care had failed to prevent her death – to improve [[child welfare|child protection]] by improving the way information about children is shared between services. The database, created under the [[Children Act 2004]], will cost [[pound sterling|£]]224m to set up and £41m a year to run. It will be operating in 150 [[local government in the United Kingdom|local authorities]], and be accessible to at least 330,000 users. The database has gone through the pilot phase and will be fully operational by the end of 2008. The database has been heavily criticised from a wide range of groups, mainly for [[data privacy|privacy]], [[information security|security]] and child protection reasons. ==Development== {{seealso|Murder of Victoria Climbié}} In spring 1999, Victoria Climbié (born 2 November 1991 — 25 February 2000 in Abobo, [[Côte d'Ivoire|Ivory Coast]]) and her great aunt Marie-Thérèse Kouao arrived in London, sent by her parents for a chance of an education. A few months later, Kouao met Carl Manning on a bus which he was driving, and she and Victoria moved into his flat. It was here that she was abused, including being beaten with hammers, bike chains, and wires; being forced to sleep in a bin liner in the bath; and being tied up for periods of longer than 24 hours. Up to her death, the [[law enforcement in the United Kingdom|police]], the [[social welfare|social services]] of many local authorities, the [[NHS]], the [[NSPCC]], and local churches all had contact with her, and noted the signs of abuse. However, in what the judge in the trial following Victoria's death described as "blinding incompetence",<ref>"[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1113740.stm Inquiry into Climbie officials]", BBC, [[12 January]] [[2001]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> all failed to properly investigate the abuse and little action was taken. On 24 February 2000, Victoria was admitted into an accident-and-emergency department, semi-unconscious and suffering from hypothermia, multiple organ failure and malnutrition. She died the next day, aged eight. On 20 November 2000, her guardians, Marie Thérèse Kouao and Carl Manning, were charged with child cruelty and [[child murder|murder]]; on 12 January 2001, both were found guilty, and sentenced to life imprisonment.<ref>"[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/2062590.stm Timeline: Victoria Climbie]", BBC, [[28 January]] [[2003]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> Victoria's death led to a [[public inquiry]], launched on 31 May 2001<ref>"[http://www.victoria-climbie-inquiry.org.uk/News_Update/may.htm#31may2001 Victoria (Anna) Climbié inquiry is launched]", The Victoria Climbié Inquiry, [[31 May]] [[2007]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> and chaired by [[Herbert Laming, Baron Laming|Herbert Laming]], which investigated the role of the agencies involved in her care.<ref>"[http://www.victoria-climbie-inquiry.org.uk/Background/back_about.htm About the Inquiry]", The Victoria Climbié Inquiry. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> The report, published on 28 January 2003,<ref>"[http://www.victoria-climbie-inquiry.org.uk/News_Update/jan03.htm#2jan03 Victoria Climbié Report Calls for Radical Change in the Management of Public Services for Children and Families]", [[28 January]] [[2003]]; {{PDFlink|''[http://www.victoria-climbie-inquiry.org.uk/finreport/report.pdf Report of an Inquiry]''|1.74&nbsp;[[Mebibyte|MiB]]<!-- application/pdf, 1831701 bytes -->}}, [[28 January]] [[2003]]. The Victoria Climbié Inquiry. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> found that the agencies involved in her care failed to protect her and that on at least 12 occasions, workers involved in her case could have prevented her death. The Laming report led to, amongst other things, the creation of the [[Every Child Matters]] programme, which consists of three [[green paper]]s: ''Every Child Matters'', published in September 2003; ''Every Child Matters: The Next Steps'', published in early 2004; and ''Every Child Matters: Change for Children'', published in November 2004.<ref>"[http://www.teachernet.gov.uk/wholeschool/greenpapersummary/ Every Child Matters: Change for Children]", teachernet.gov.uk. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref><ref>"[http://www.everychildmatters.gov.uk/aims/background/ Background to Every Child Matters]", everychildmatters.gov.uk. [[10 May]] [[2005]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]]</ref> The database proposals were announced in September 2003,<ref>Batty, David; Carvel, John, "[http://society.guardian.co.uk/children/story/0,,1038411,00.html Plan to keep file on every child]", ''The Guardian'', [[9 September]] [[2003]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> alongside the publication of ''Every Child Matters'', and is being created under Section 12 of the Children Act 2004. The idea of a child database, however, preceded the Laming report and was suggested in a report, ''Privacy and Data Sharing: The Way Forward for Public Services'', by the [[Performance and Innovation Unit]], published on 11 April 2002 – over a year before the Laming report – and was not related to child abuse.<ref name="Munro">Munro, Eileen, "[http://society.guardian.co.uk/children/comment/0,1074,1186315,00.html National child database will increase risk]", ''The Guardian'', [[6 April]] [[2004]]. {{PDFlink|"[http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/strategy/downloads/su/privacy/downloads/piu-data.pdf ''Privacy and Data Sharing: The Way Forward for Public Services'']"|951&nbsp;[[Kibibyte|KiB]]<!-- application/pdf, 974426 bytes -->}}, Performance and Innovation Unit, [[11 April]] [[2002]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> The pilot schemes (designated as identification, referral and tracking (IRT) schemes) began with [[Metropolitan Borough of Bolton|Bolton council]] in 2003<ref>Batty, David, "[http://society.guardian.co.uk/children/story/0,,1084298,00.html Bolton kick-starts child database pilot]", ''The Guardian'', [[12 November]] [[2003]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> and was used by eleven other local authorities.<ref>The twelve local authorities were [[Barnsley]]; [[Bolton]]; [[Coventry]]; [[Cumbria]]; [[Dorset]] with [[Bournemouth]] and [[Poole]]; [[Gateshead]]; [[Knowsley]]; [[Leicestershire]], [[Leicester]] and [[Rutland]]; [[Nottinghamshire]]; [[Sheffield]]; [[Telford and Wrekin]] and [[Shropshire]]; and [[Wandsworth]]. [http://www.arch-ed.org/issues/children_act/s12_150406.htm Children Act – The Index], Action on Rights for Children, April 2004. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> There were doubts as to the legality of Bolton council obtaining data of children from the local [[NHS Primary Care Trust|Primary Care Trust]] to put on the database, but the council was eventually advised that it was legal. The other pilot areas followed, in different ways.<ref>Carvel, John, "[http://society.guardian.co.uk/children/story/0,,1219380,00.html All eyes on the child]", ''The Guardian'', [[19 May]] [[2004]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> On 8 December 2005, the [[Secretary of State for Education and Skills]], [[Ruth Kelly]], made the official announcement of the introduction of the database, confirmed by the [[Minister of State for Children, Young People and Families]], [[Beverley Hughes]].<ref>[http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmhansrd/cm051208/wmstext/51208m01.htm#51208m01.html_dpthd1 House of Commons Hansard Written Ministerial Statements for 8 Dec 2005 (pt 1), Column 114WS], United Kingdom Parliament, [[8 December]] [[2005]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref><ref>"[http://www.dfes.gov.uk/pns/DisplayPN.cgi?pn_id=2005_0154 Better services for children as government acts on Lord Laming recommendation]", Department for Education and Skills, [[8 December]] [[2005]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref><ref>Lightfoot, Liz, "[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/12/09/nchild09.xml Information on every child to be kept in new database]", ''The Daily Telegraph'', [[9 December]] [[2005]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> To allow the introduction of the database, the government required all local authorities to implement the [[Integrated Children's System]], a framework to help improve outcomes for children. The government set a deadline of 1 January 2007, and 92 out of the 150 local authorities failed to achieve this.<ref>Kablenet, "[http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/12/11/ics_runs_late/ Councils to miss child database deadline]", ''The Register'', [[11 December]] [[2006]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> The government began a consultation on the 2007 draft regulations<ref name="2007DR">{{PDFlink|[http://www.dfes.gov.uk/consultations/downloadableDocs/The%20Information%20Sharing%20Index%20(England)%20Regulations%202007%20(Draft)-PDF.pdf The Information Sharing Index (England) Regulations 2007]|78.7&nbsp;[[Kibibyte|KiB]]}}, Department for Education and Skills, 2007. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> on 21 September 2006 which ended on 14 December 2006.<ref>"[http://www.dfes.gov.uk/consultations/conResults.cfm?consultationId=1431 ContactPoint*: Consultation on Draft Information Sharing Index (England) Regulations and Partial Regulatory Impact Assessment]", Department for Education and Skills. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> In October 2006, the government selected Capgemini to design the database.<ref>McCue, Andy, "[http://www.silicon.com/publicsector/0,3800010403,39163160,00.htm Capgemini to design £224m national child database]", silicon.com, [[12 October]] [[2006]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref><ref>Lipowicz, Alice, "[http://www.washingtontechnology.com/online/1_1/29542-1.html Capgemini captures $400M UK database deal]", washingtontechnology.com, [[18 October]] [[2006]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2006]].</ref> On 15 February 2007, the database was renamed from ''Information Sharing Index'' to ''ContactPoint'', following research with stakeholder groups, including children and families, who decided that the name ''ContactPoint'' made clear what the purpose of the database was: to improve communication between those working with children.<ref>{{PDFlink|[http://www.dfes.gov.uk/childrenandfamilies/pdfs/LAC(SG07_7)ContactPoint.pdf Children's Services: Local Authority Circular]|92.1&nbsp;[[Kibibyte|KiB]]<!-- application/pdf, 94349 bytes -->}}, Department for Education and Skills, [[8 March]] [[2007]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref><ref>"[http://www.nottinghamcity.gov.uk/ics-home/ics-isa/ics-isindex/ics-contactpoint-febmarupdate.htm ContactPoint – formerly known as the Information Sharing Index]", Nottingham City Council, February/March 2007. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> A consultation on a guide for database users<ref name="PG">{{PDFlink|"[http://www.everychildmatters.gov.uk/_files/ACB1BA35C20D4C42A1FE6F9133A7C614.pdf Information sharing: Practitioner's guide]"|460&nbsp;[[Kibibyte|KiB]]}}, Department for Education and Skills. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> was launched on 4 May 2007 and ended on 27 July 2007.<ref>"[http://www.dfes.gov.uk/consultations/conDetails.cfm?consultationId=1482 ContactPoint: Consultation on Draft Guidance]", Department for Education and Skills. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> The database is expected to cost £224m to set up, spread over three years beginning December 2005 (therefore costing £81m a year for the first three years), and £41m a year thereafter. The database, which will be operating in 150 local authorities and will be accessible by at least 330,000 users,<ref>Ward, Lucy, "[http://politics.guardian.co.uk/homeaffairs/story/0,,2105272,00.html 330,000 users to have access to database on England’s children]", ''The Guardian'', [[27 June]] [[2007]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> was expected to be fully operational by the end of 2008; however, following the [[2007 UK child benefit data scandal]], the deadline was pushed back for five months to allow a security review prior to implementation.<ref>"[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/7115546.stm Child database system postponed]",''BBC News'',[[27 June]][[2007]].</ref> Training for the workers had been planned begin in spring 2008.<ref>"[http://www.childrennow.co.uk/news/index.cfm?fuseaction=details&UID=08d7e529-97a8-46b6-a40f-3a39fa6ea60a Information sharing: Training on child index set for 2008]", ''Children Now'', [[23 May]] [[2007]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> ==Use== The government says the database was set up to improve child protection by improving the way information about children is shared between services. Only professionals whose job involves supporting children will be able to access the database, and they will be required to undergo enhanced [[Criminal Records Bureau]] checks and training.<ref>"[http://www.reading.gov.uk/healthandsocialcare/childrenandyoungpeople/everychildmattersinreading/everychildmattersinitiatives/contactpoint/General.asp?id=SX9452-A7826545 ContactPoint in Reading], Reading Borough Council. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> Each local authority will decide who may access the database provided their role is listed in the ContactPoint Regulations. Users will need to provide a reason for accessing a record, and an [[audit trail]] will be kept on access to the database to help detect misuse.<ref>"[http://www.childrennow.co.uk/news/index.cfm?fuseaction=details&UID=fe7c6887-3984-44d8-b70d-3a9acdda5e25 Child index: Information sharing: your questions answered] ", ''Children Now'', [[2 May]] [[2007]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> Professionals who have completed a [[Common Assessment Framework]],<ref>See the Common Assessment Framework form at: {{PDFlink|[http://www.everychildmatters.gov.uk/_files/56CA6743B3A0F3D55E268B0EC067DC7A.pdf CAF form]|78.0&nbsp;[[Kibibyte|KiB]]}}, everychildmatters.gov.uk. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> a tool used to assess a child's situation, will be able to record on a child's record that they have carried out this assessment. No information contained in this assessment will be held on ContactPoint. Under the [[Data Protection Act]], all organisations supplying data to the database will have to inform children and guardians through fair-processing notices.<ref>"[http://www.participationworks.org.uk/News/May2007/ChildrensDatabaseGuidanceConsultationLaunched/tabid/285/Default.aspx Children’s Database Guidance Consultation Launched]", participationworks.org.uk, [[31 May]] [[2007]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> Subjects of the database can make access requests, in writing, to view any personal data that organisations hold on them on the database and to correct any mistakes. The government estimates that the benefit of reducing unproductive work time using the database is valued at more than £88m.<ref>"[http://childrenfirst.northtyneside.gov.uk/item.asp?CID=31023 Information Sharing Index]", North Tyneside Council. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> ==Content== The entries for each child are to consist of: *name, address, gender and date of birth; *a unique identifying number; *the name and contact details of any person with [[parental responsibility (access and custody)|parental responsibility]] or who has care of him at any time; *details of any education being received by him, including details of any educational institution attended; *the name and contact details of any person providing primary medical and other services specified by the [[Secretary of State (United Kingdom)|Secretary of State]]; *information as to the existence of any cause for concern in relation to him; *other information, not including medical records or other personal records, specified by the Secretary of State.<ref>[http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2004/40031--c.htm#12 Children Act 2004, Part 2, Section 12], Office of Public Sector Information. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> The database will not hold case or assessment material or any subjective observations. The database can include information of a ‘sensitive’ nature, defined as issues relating to [[reproductive health|sexual health]], [[mental health]] and [[substance abuse]],<ref name="2007DR"/> although consent from the child or the child’s guardians is needed, and it will not appear as such on the database; it will only note that the child is receiving help from 'sensitive services' and will not say what this is. Refusal of consent can be overridden if this can be justified.<ref name="PG"/> [[Margaret Hodge]], then children’s minister, has said that drug or alcohol use by parents, relatives and neighbours, together with other aspects of their behaviour, may be recorded.<ref>Batty, David, "[http://society.guardian.co.uk/children/story/0,1074,1271792,00.html Hodge named 'worst public servant']", ''The Guardian'', [[29 July]] [[2004]]. Retrieved [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> Government guidelines reveal that other information recorded may include 'family routines', evidence of a 'disorgan-ised/chaotic lifestyle', 'ways in which the family’s income is used', signs of mental illness or alcohol misuse by relatives, and 'any serious difficulties in the parents’ relationship'.<ref>[http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article3690018.ece Child database will ‘pry into family life’], ''[[The Sunday Times]]'', published 2008-04-06, accessed 2008-04-17</ref> In August 2006, the [[Department for Education and Skills]] (DfES) announced that the database will not include telephone numbers or addresses of celebrities' children, nor of those of children with violent parents.<ref name="celebrity">Batty, David, "[http://society.guardian.co.uk/children/story/0,,1862231,00.html Child database attacked over celebrity exclusions]", ''The Guardian'', [[31 August]] [[2006]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> Records of children who may be at risk could be 'shielded'; this will be determined on a case-by-case basis. The technical specification for ContactPoint does not include the capacity to store biometric data.<ref>[http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200607/cmhansrd/cm070328/text/70328w0006.htm#07032882000715 House of Commons Hansard Written Answers to Questions for 28 Mar 2007 : Column 1543W], United Kingdom Parliament, [[28 March]] [[2007]]. Retrieved on [[21 September]] [[2007]].</ref> ==Coverage== The database will hold information on about 11 million children. Records will be kept until six years after the child turns 18, or if they leave England and Wales with no intention of returning.<ref>Payne, Lisa, "[http://www.childrennow.co.uk/news/index.cfm?fuseaction=details&UID=14a36d38-0dc7-491b-9942-7968352f747d Briefing: Crib sheet - Information sharing]", ''Children Now'', [[13 June]] [[2007]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> The database can also apply to 18–25-year-olds who are [[foster care|care leavers]] or have [[developmental disability|learning disabilities]] (although the [[Convention on the Rights of the Child|United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child]] only applies to those under 18 in England and Wales), and their permission is needed.<ref>[http://www.everychildmatters.gov.uk/deliveringservices/contactpoint/about/ About ContactPoint], everychildmatters.gov.uk, [[10 May]] [[2007]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> ==Criticism== There have been significant privacy concerns about the database. The [[Foundation for Information Policy Research]] produced a report in November 2006, ''Children’s Databases – Privacy and Safety'', saying the database guidelines ignored family values and privacy, and that the details on the database needs to be "looked at carefully".<ref>"[http://www.fipr.org/press/061122kids.html IT systems designed to protect kids will put them at risk instead]"; {{PDFlink|''[http://www.fipr.org/childrens_databases.pdf Children's Databases – Safety and Privacy]''|1.16&nbsp;[[Mebibyte|MiB]]<!-- application/pdf, 1220076 bytes -->}}, Foundation for Information Policy Research, [[22 November]] [[2006]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> The government responded by saying they had "serious reservations about [the] report's objectivity and evidence base". Terri Dowty, one of the report's authors, replied, "it's an appalling aspersion to throw at some of the leading academics in this field. I'm astonished they are challenging the evidence we used since much of the evidence in the report is from the Government itself."<ref>Donovan, Tristan, "[http://www.childrennow.co.uk/news/index.cfm?fuseaction=details&UID=d31d68b4-b7aa-49ab-acef-4921d73d91b2 Social Care News: Information sharing - Academics clash with DfES over report]", ''Children Now'', [[29 November]] [[2006]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> [[Action on Rights for Children]] said that the proposals invade a child's right to privacy given by the Convention on the Rights of the Child, while the [[Joint Committee on Human Rights]] said that the "serious interference" with the rights under Article 8 of the [[European Convention on Human Rights]] – the right to respect for private life – seems to be "difficult to justify".<ref>[http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/jt200304/jtselect/jtrights/161/16106.htm Joint Committee On Human Rights - Nineteenth Report], Joint Committee on Human Rights, [[21 September]] [[2004]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> [[Liberty (pressure group)|Liberty]], a [[civil liberties]] interest group, said governments should not interfere with family life, warning against complacency "about the importance of privacy in a free society".<ref name="concerns">"[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/5120524.stm Concerns over new child database]", BBC, [[27 June]] [[2006]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> The [[British Medical Association]] raised concerns that it may breach [[physician-patient privilege|doctor–patient confidentiality]].<ref>Batty, David, "[http://society.guardian.co.uk/children/story/0,,1072743,00.html BMA raises concern over child databases]", ''The Guardian'', [[29 October]] [[2003]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> The phrase 'any cause for concern' has been criticised as being potential overly wide-ranging and intrusive,<ref>Ward, Lucy, "[http://society.guardian.co.uk/children/story/0,,1337631,00.html 'Flags of concern' on child database]", ''The Guardian'', [[28 October]] [[2004]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> and there are fears of [[scope creep|function creep]].<ref>"[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3568468.stm Watchdog's Big Brother UK warning]", BBC, [[16 August]] [[2004]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> A study by the [[Office of the Children's Commissioner]], ''<nowiki>'</nowiki>I think it’s about trust<nowiki>'</nowiki>: The views of young people on information sharing'', found that children themselves were concerned about invasions of their privacy, and that they would be reluctant to use 'sensitive services' if this would go on the database.<ref>"[http://www.nspcc.org.uk/Inform/Research/Findings/IThinkItsAboutTrust_ifega38731.html I think it’s about trust: The views of young people on information sharing]"; Hilton, Zoe; Mills, Chris, {{PDFlink|''[http://www.nspcc.org.uk/inform/publications/downloads/IThinkItsAboutTrust_gf38729.pdf 'I think it’s about trust': The views of young people on information sharing]''|384&nbsp;[[Kibibyte|KiB]]<!-- application/pdf, 393802 bytes -->}}, NSPCC, September 2006. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2006]].</ref><ref>Batty, David, "[http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1868270,00.html Children fear intrusion of national database, report finds]", ''The Guardian'', [[8 September]] [[2006]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] 2007.</ref> Commentators have expressed concern about the country's increasing [[surveillance]]. In August 2004, the [[Information Commissioner's Office (UK)|information commissioner]], [[Richard Thomas (Information Commissioner)|Richard Thomas]], drawing a parallel with the way that governments in [[Eastern bloc|Eastern Europe]] and [[Francisco Franco|Spain]] gained too much power and information in the 20th century, expressed concern over this and other national databases, including the [[Citizen Information Project]], [[National Programme for IT|NHS National Programme for IT]], and the introduction of [[British national identity card|identity cards]], warning that there was a danger of the country "sleepwalk[ing] into a [[mass surveillance|surveillance society]]".<ref>"[http://www.privacyinternational.org/article.shtml?cmd%5B347%5D=x-347-66664 UK Information Commissioner Warns of ID Cards and Surveillance Society]", Privacy International, [[16 August]] [[2004]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref><ref>"[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3568468.stm Watchdog's Big Brother UK warning]", [[16 August]] [[2004]]; "[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/5172890.stm Trust warning over personal data]", [[13 July]] [[2006]]. BBC. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> On 18 April 2006, [[Des Browne]], the [[Secretary of State for Defence|secretary of state for defence]], said "the Department for Education and Skills should also consider whether there is scope to realise further efficiency and effectiveness benefits through a child population register",<ref>[http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmhansrd/cm060418/wmstext/60418m01.htm#60418m01.html_writ0 House of Commons Hansard Written Ministerial Statements for 18 Apr 2006 (pt 1), Column 1WS], United Kingdom Parliament, [[18 April]] [[2006]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> and it is thought that the database may be used in conjunction with the [[National Identity Register]] and other databases.<ref>"[http://www.arch-ed.org/issues/databases/children_index.htm 7. The Children's Index]", Action on Rights for Children. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref><ref>Boggan, Steve, "[http://politics.guardian.co.uk/homeaffairs/story/0,,2022115,00.html No more secrets]", ''The Guardian'', [[27 February]] [[2007]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> Phil Booth, national coordinator of [[NO2ID]], a group opposing identity cards, said this was "cradle-to-grave surveillance".<ref>"[http://www.childrennow.co.uk/news/index.cfm?fuseaction=details&UID=e649b7fe-a338-4b5d-91e7-2c69554ef88b Information sharing - Child index could link to ID cards]", ''Children Now'', [[26 April]] [[2006]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> [[Conservative Party (UK)|Conservative Party]] [[Member of Parliament|member of parliament]] [[Oliver Heald]] said, 'there is already public concern at government plans for a compulsory identity card database, a [[nanny state]] children's database and a property database for the council tax revaluation'.<ref>Priestley, Sally, "[http://www.epolitix.com/EN/News/200609/6eb14426-d9a4-473c-b3e8-d7b8454ec6ff.htm Minister defends data-sharing scheme]", epolitix.com, [[14 September]] [[2006]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> Liz Davies of [[London Metropolitan University]] argued that "ContactPoint, the new database for every child in the country, is in effect a population-surveillance tool" and that "for five years, the system to prevent child abuse has been vanishing before our eyes".<ref>Davies, Liz, "[http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/story/0,,2022865,00.html Our children have less protection now than did Victoria Climbié]", ''The Guardian'', [[28 February]] [[2007]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> Fiona Nicholson of [[Education Otherwise]], a home-education support group, agreed with this assessment and said that "frontline staff working to protect vulnerable children have also expressed disbelief that investing hundreds of millions in IT can be the best way to safeguard children". Laming, however, said that Davies' assertion was a "gross distortion of what is an intelligent application of technology aimed at ensuring every child benefits from the universal services".<ref>"[http://www.guardian.co.uk/letters/story/0,,2024647,00.html Pros and cons of the children's database]", ''The Guardian'', [[2 March]] [[2007]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> [[Privacy International]] awarded Hodge the 2004 [[Big Brother Award]] for "Worst Public Servant", partly due to her backing of the database.<ref>"[http://www.privacyinternational.org/article.shtml?cmd%5B347%5D=x-347-63280 Privacy International Announces Winners of 6th Annual Big Brother Awards]", Privacy International, [[28 July]] [[2004]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> Security concerns about the database have been significant, and commentators have said that there is a large risk of abuse of the system.<ref> Meikle, James, "[http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2108739,00.html Schools warn of abuse risk from IT database]", ''The Guardian'', [[22 June]] [[2007]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> Evidence presented in 2006 to the management board of the Leeds [[NHS Trust]] showed that in one month the 14,000 staff logged 70,000 incidents of inappropriate access.<ref>"[http://www.guardian.co.uk/letters/story/0,,2108634,00.html ContactPoint is open to potential abuse]", ''The Guardian'', [[22 June]] [[2007]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> [[Child sexual abuse|Sex offenders targeting children]] may use the database to find vulnerable victims.<ref>"[http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=402946&in_page_id=1770&ito=1490 Privacy row erupts over child database]", ''The Daily Mail'', [[30 August]] [[2006]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref><ref>"[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?view=BLOGDETAIL&grid=F11&blog=yourview&xml=/news/2006/08/31/ublview31.xml Is the 'Children's Index' an invasion of privacy?]", ''The Daily Telegraph'', [[31 August]] [[2006]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> The celebrity exclusions have been attacked, with critics saying that it underlined fears about security, and that government ministers may decide to exclude their own children from the database.<ref name="celebrity"/><ref>Womack, Sarah, "[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/08/31/ndatabase31.xml Celebrity children will get database privacy]", ''The Daily Telegraph'', [[2 September]] [[2006]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> The proposals may break [[data protection]] and [[human rights]] laws. Some have said that the database may lead to [[self-fulfilling prophecy|self-fulfilling prophecies]], where children from difficult backgrounds are treated as potential delinquents.<ref>Goodwin, Bill, "[http://www.computerweekly.com/Articles/2006/11/22/220104/experts-criticise-government-child-database-plans.htm Experts criticise government child database plans]", Computer Weekly, [[22 November]] [[2006]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> The government have been accused of using the public's response to the death of Victoria Climbié to force through the unpopular proposal and to curb civil liberties.<ref>Clements, David, "[http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/1889/ Every Child Matters – but so does our privacy]", Spiked, [[16 October]] [[2006]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> There are concerns that the database will undermine child protection and parents, weakening the power of parents to look after children, and will 'do more harm than good'.<ref>Batty, David, "[http://www.guardian.co.uk/child/story/0,7369,1397416,00.html Database 'will undermine child protection']", ''The Guardian'', [[24 January]] [[2005]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref><ref>Searing, Hilary, "[http://www.radical.org.uk/barefoot/data.htm Why Social Workers Oppose the Child Database]", radical.org.uk, June 2006. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> The sheer size of the database could mean that serious cases are overlooked due to the abundance of minor incidents.<ref>Batty, David, "[http://society.guardian.co.uk/children/story/0,1074,1162166,00.html Child protection overhaul ‘could lead to false alarms]", ''The Guardian'', [[4 March]] [[2004]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> There have been doubts towards the government’s estimate of the cost of the database. The information commissioner estimates it at £1bn,<ref name="fiasco">"[http://society.guardian.co.uk/children/story/0,,1409249,00.html Child database could be new IT fiasco, says Hodge]", ''The Guardian'', [[9 February]] [[2005]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> which Hodge said was "absurd",<ref>Ward, Lucy, "[http://society.guardian.co.uk/children/story/0,,1409594,00.html Hodge defends IT project]", ''The Guardian'', [[10 February]] [[2005]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> and others have raised concerns over the cost,<ref>Batty, David, "[http://society.guardian.co.uk/children/comment/0,,1417740,00.html Information overload]", ''The Guardian'', 18 February 2005. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> noting that government projects tend to go over-budget. Some have questioned children’s ability to give informed [[consent]] in their own right. [[Mary Marsh]], chief executive of the [[NSPCC]], wanted the database to cover the whole of the United Kingdom, not just England and Wales, saying "the information held would be only partial and potentially worse than useless".<ref>"[http://www.childrennow.co.uk/news/index.cfm?fuseaction=details&UID=ae8d3a75-da10-465d-88e1-7cff6b102c3e Child index: NSPCC demands a UK-wide database]", ''Children Now'', [[4 October]] [[2006]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> On 27 June 2006, a child protection conference, 'Children: Over Surveilled, Under Protected',<ref>[http://childrenoversurveilled.lse.ac.uk/ Children: Over Surveilled, Under Protected], London School of Economics. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> held at the [[London School of Economics]], reached the conclusion that the database will do nothing to prevent child abuse, and that it will undermine parents' ability to look after their children.<ref>Bristow, Jennie, "[http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/1281/ Children: over-surveilled, under-protected]", Spiked, [[20 July]] [[2006]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref><ref>Donovan, Tristan, "[http://www.childrennow.co.uk/news/index.cfm?fuseaction=details&UID=9e222e71-3d2b-4206-8cea-958bfd8c9320 Information sharing: Government faces growing opposition to child index]", ''Children Now'', [[5 July]] [[2006]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> The government have rejected most of the negative criticism. The DfES said that the database will only contain basic information and "will certainly not be including any information on children's diet or school attainment".<ref name="concerns" /> Laming has said that information for every child needs to be kept so that they would ''not'' be at risk.<ref>"[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/file_on_4/4626875.stm 'Children at risk without database']", BBC, [[28 June]] [[2005]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> The government have denied any possibility of function creep. They have rebuttal the concerns over privacy, with a spokesman for the DfES saying "we are conscious of the need to respect personal privacy".<ref>"[http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/6171224.stm Database details 'harm children']", BBC, [[22 November]] [[2006]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> Hodge has said that the database will be secure, that it will not undermine child protection and that it will help various agencies share information.<ref name="fiasco" /> Hughes has said that the database will be secure and that "we are confident we are doing all we can to ensure security".<ref>"[http://society.guardian.co.uk/children/story/0,,2111449,00.html The ContactPoint system is secure]", ''The Guardian'', [[26 June]] [[2007]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> The government have said that they are confident that the database complies with the [[Data Protection Act]] and the [[Human Rights Act 1998|Human Rights Act]].<ref>[http://www.everychildmatters.gov.uk/deliveringservices/contactpoint/legislation/ ContactPoint: legislation], everychildmatters.gov.uk, [[16 February]] [[2007]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2007]].</ref> [[Paul Ennals]], chief executive of the [[National Children's Bureau]], said, "the index is a proportionate response to a continuing problem and any action that helps reduce the number of children who slip through the net must be welcome".<ref>"[http://www.childrennow.co.uk/news/index.cfm?fuseaction=details&UID=97eab3a3-beea-4c4b-a514-7a9c14cf8901 Analysis: Information sharing - Index plans get a warm welcome]", ''Children Now'', [[11 January]] [[2006]]. Retrieved on [[27 June]] [[2006]].</ref> ==References== {{reflist|2}} ==External links== *[http://www.everychildmatters.gov.uk/deliveringservices/contactpoint/ ContactPoint] *[http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2004/40031--c.htm#12 Children Act 2004, Part 2, Section 12] • [http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2004/20040031.htm Children Act 2004] • [http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/en2004/2004en31.htm Explanatory Notes to Children Act 2004] *[http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2006/20060983.htm The Information Sharing Index (England) Regulations 2006] • {{PDFlink|[http://www.dfes.gov.uk/consultations/downloadableDocs/The%20Information%20Sharing%20Index%20(England)%20Regulations%202007%20(Draft)-PDF.pdf The Information Sharing Index (England) Regulations 2007]|78.7&nbsp;[[Kibibyte|KiB]]}} *[http://www.arch-ed.org/issues/databases/IS%20Index.htm Action on Rights for Children – The Children’s Information Sharing (IS) Index] • [http://archrights.wordpress.com/ The ARCH Blog] *[http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1868270,00.html ''The Guardian''] — list of articles at the bottom *[http://www.everychildmatters.gov.uk/ Every Child Matters] *[http://www.victoria-climbie-inquiry.org.uk/ The Victoria Climbié Inquiry] • [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/uk/2002/victoria_climbie_inquiry/default.stm BBC: Victoria Climbié inquiry] • [http://society.guardian.co.uk/climbie/0,10939,530323,00.html ''The Guardian'': The Climbié inquiry] [[Category:Databases in the United Kingdom]] [[Category:Government of the United Kingdom]] [[Category:Juvenile law]]