There will be “meaningful human involvement” in automated decisions, the technology minister has promised – but will it be more than a “rubber stamp”? As the Data (Use and Access) (DUA) Bill becomes law, that is the question plaguing privacy campaigners.
The bill – which the government pledges will “unlock the power of data to drive efficiencies in our public services” – establishes new data-sharing rules in the UK. It received royal assent on Thursday (19 June).
From a real-time map of burst pipes to patient records sent instantly between NHS trusts, to money-saving apps for working families, it promises to quietly improve many aspects of daily life – and inject £10 billion into the British economy over ten years.
But it also opens the door to a profound shift in how decisions about us are made – increasingly, by machines.
“It is a weakening of our rights on all fronts,” said Jasleen Chaggar, legal and policy officer from Big Brother Watch. “Particularly around automated decision making.”
Advertising helps fund Big Issue’s mission to end poverty
Advertisement
One of the bill’s most significant changes is to the legal framework for algorithmic decisions. Under current UK GDPR, people are protected from being subject to solely automated decisions that have a significant effect – unless certain strict conditions are met. The DUA Bill broadens the scope of automated decision making.
“Solely automated decision making is going to become permitted more broadly, unless it involves processing of special category data [like ethnicity or gender]: Chaggar explained. “That means decisions could be made about people based on their socioeconomic status, their postcode data, their accents, or even their referred emotions… and all of that is really quite worrying.”
The government says this is a measured shift – not a free-for-all. It insists meaningful human oversight will be preserved. Speaking to the Big Issue days before the bill received royal assent, the minister of state for data protection and telecoms Chris Bryant pushed back on criticism.
“One of the things that we wanted to make sure was that automated decision making has to have the meaningful – this is the key word – meaningful involvement of a human being,” he said. “And also, you have the right – so let’s say, for instance, you apply for insurance for your car, and you think you’ve been turned down simply by an automated decision-making process – you have the right to say, no, I want a person to look at this as well.”
Clause 80 of the bill makes explicit provision for this: “The safeguards must… enable the data subject to contest such decisions.”
Campaigners welcome that commitment in theory – but fear the follow-through may fall short.
Advertising helps fund Big Issue’s mission to end poverty
“One of our concerns is oftentimes that human can just be a sort of rubber stamp – if they don’t have the right training, if they don’t actually understand what the AI system, the logic behind it, and the output that it’s given… all of that means that it’s not really meaningful human input,” Chaggar said.
She pointed to the Public Authorities (Fraud Error and Debt) Bill, which would allow the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) to use banks’ algorithms to scan benefit recipients’ accounts.
“That would allow the DWP to force banks to algorithmically scan the bank accounts of all their customers and identify people who are receiving benefits payments from the government,” Chaggar said.
“If it looks like they are ineligible, they’ll be flagged by the automated system and their personal information, their name, their account number, will go back to the DWP for further investigation. Now, at the moment, the government has said any processing of data in this way will have a human check on it, a human in the loop will check it before investigation.
“Under the Data Use and Access Bill, that prohibition wouldn’t be in place. So theoretically, speaking, if you’re flagged by your bank to the DWP, it could automatically trigger an investigation.”
What are some of the data law’s benefits?
The minister remains confident in the bill’s benefits, adding: “In the next few years you will see a radical difference.”
Advertising helps fund Big Issue’s mission to end poverty
He cited an example from his own constituency of Rhondda and Ogmore: “One of my constituents recently had a fall at Bristol Airport and had to go to hospital. Unfortunately… they couldn’t exchange her medical records. So somebody had to drive physically to go and get them. Now, I mean, clearly that’s a nonsense.”
Under the bill, data-sharing provisions will mean NHS trusts can communicate “instantly”, he said.
On “smart data”, Bryant said he hopes to replicate the transformation seen in the banking sector across energy, retail and more. “Everybody goes ‘smart data’. I haven’t the faintest idea what that means. Because of smart banking, you can manage on your phone to get the details from different bank accounts that you might have with different banks, and you can put them all into one wallet, if you want to… We want to do the same for so many other different sectors.”
“My favourite one is actually about your smart meter, your electricity meter at home. It’s not very smart at all. If we could make it smart, and we had smart data availability in that sector, you would be able to get much better information about how to save money on your gas and electricity bills.”
From reducing paperwork to tailoring grocery bills, the bill promises smarter, faster services.
But rights remain a red line for campaigners. Politicians, too, are unsure – the bill ping-ponged between the House of Commons and the House of Lords for weeks.
Advertising helps fund Big Issue’s mission to end poverty
Peers wanted an amendment forcing tech companies to declare their use of copyright material when training AI tools.
Sir Elton John even weighed in, describing this kind of unlicensed training as “theft, thievery on a high scale”.
The amendment failed; minister Bryant said that the government is carrying out a separate consultation on AI copyright and wants to look at the rights of creatives “in the round”.
As the use of AI and automation across private and public sectors ramps up, these debates around digital rights will only get more pronounced. While they continue, privacy must not be the price of innovation, Chaggar warned.
“Growth isn’t the only thing that matters. Rights matter. Privacy matters. And we risk losing them in the name of progress we haven’t properly scrutinised.”
Will you sign Big Issue's petition to ask Keir Starmer to pass a Poverty Zero law? It's time to hold government to account on poverty once and for all.
