According to internal government minutes obtained by The Observer, UK Home Office officials have developed covert plans to lobby the independent privacy regulator in an effort to hasten the adoption of contentious facial recognition technology in high street stores and supermarkets.

Policing minister Chris Philp, senior Home Office officials, and the commercial company Facewatch, whose facial recognition cameras have drawn vociferous criticism after being deployed in stores, came to an agreement on the covert strategy on March 8 during a meeting held behind closed doors.

The minutes of the meeting appear to show Home Office officials agreeing to write to the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) praising the benefits of facial recognition technology in combating "retail crime". This is a development that ignores critics who claim the technology violates human rights and is biased, particularly against darker-skinned people. 

"The Home Office must urgently answer questions about this meeting, which appears to have led officials to lean on the ICO in order to favour a firm that sells highly invasive facial recognition technology," Mark Johnson, advocacy manager of the campaign group Big Brother Watch, said, adding that government ministers "should strive to protect human rights, not cosy up to private companies whose products pose serious threats to civil liberties in the UK."

According to the minutes of the previously secret meeting, Philp, who was named policing minister by Rishi Sunak last October, and Simon Gordon, the creator of Facewatch, talked about "retail crime and the benefits of privately owned facial recognition technology."

In a later meeting action plan, it was stated that officials were "to draft a letter to ICO setting out the effects of retail crime."

Philp would also "consider a speech to bring the benefits of FR [facial recognition] to the fore."

What specific communication took place between the Home Office and the privacy regulator on Facewatch is still unknown.

The minutes do, however, imply that Philp is aware that any efforts to put pressure on the independent regulator could not be successful.

"CP [Chris Philp] reiterated that the ICO are independent and he can’t attempt to change their rulings or opinion," state the minutes the Big Brother Watch obtained after a request from a freedom of information (FoI).

The European Union is aiming to outlaw facial recognition technology in public settings through its impending artificial intelligence act, which has drawn considerable criticism and attention.

However, the UK "should seek to emulate the European artificial intelligence act, which would place a ban on the use of facial recognition for surveillance purposes in all public spaces," as per Johnson.

Advocates of installing biometric monitoring equipment on retail properties note the growing problem of retail crime, with shop thefts in the UK more than doubling in the previous six years.

The Co-op warned last week that rising levels of retail violence could cause some neighborhoods to become "no-go" regions for businesses.

The employment of Facewatch to address the issue, however, is highly divisive. In April, Sports Direct's parent firm defended its choice to install Facewatch cameras in its stores.

After 50 MPs and peers signed a letter objecting to the use of live facial recognition technology, Mike Ashley's Frasers Group claimed that the cameras had reduced crime.

According to the creator of Facewatch in 2010, Gordon, they "provide each individual business with a service that will reduce crime in their stores and make their staff safer," and every store has "10 to 20 people who just constantly steal from that store. And the store knows who they are. They’ve been preventing theft for years – this isn’t a new thing. All this is doing is using new technology to stop it."

He added that one of their big retailers "using it has a 25% [crime] reduction compared to stores not using Facewatch."

South Wales police and the London Metropolitan police have both employed facial recognition technology on several occasions, but while South Wales police continue to utilize the technology, appeal court judges determined in 2020 that prior tests of the technology by the force were illegal and unethical.

The Met stated last month that there was "no statistically significant bias in relation to race and gender, and the chance of a false match is just 1 in 6,000 people who pass the camera" in its study of the technology's performance.

Answering a question about the ministerial support for Facewatch, a Home Office spokesperson said, "It is important that businesses are free to trade without fear of crime or disorder."

He stressed that it is important that they work closely in a way to "ensure our response to retail crime is as robust as it can be."

"New technologies like facial recognition can help businesses protect their customers, staff and stock by actively managing shoplifting and crime," according to him.