The claim that most Britons back a National Health Service (NHS) ‘patient passport’ is “distinctly misleading,” former minister Sir David Davis has argued, in a welcome push-back against deceptive journalism.
A single digital system storing the health information of all patients, accessible to any doctor, pharmacist, and social care provider “when necessary,” is the top recommendation of The Times newspaper’s new Health Commission Report. The result of a year-long inquiry into the state of the NHS, this document advocates using such an app to book appointments, view test results, and arrange social care.
The document contains all the usual pro-tech assertions about the need to “fully harness the transformative power of technology and data.” It also hints at the possibility of future advances, which could see health records “connected to wearable technology such as a Fitbit or Apple Watch enabling people to receive individual health advice in real time.”
More striking is the report’s claim that more than 80% of the public supports the introduction of patient passports. This figure is based on YouGov polling for The Times Health Commission. The paper gives no indication either of the number of people polled nor of the specific questions they were (and were not) asked. The issue is further confused by an already existing NHS app, which patients have been able to download voluntarily since the COVID-19 pandemic.
Davis, who previously served as Brexit Secretary and was one of the more notable lockdown-sceptical parliamentarians, has been highly critical of the report’s findings, describing as “distinctly misleading” the claim that eight out of ten people want digital health passes.
In particular, he asked:
How much did the pollsters explain the risk to privacy in what is the most sensitive data a person has?
On this point, the report stated that 56% of the YouGov poll respondents “said it was more important to them to be able to easily book appointments, order prescriptions and view their medical records than to protect the security of their records.” It added: “Any privacy concerns were outweighed by the prospect of convenience and efficiency.” This is perhaps more telling of dire NHS waiting times and the difficulty of booking a GP appointment than it is of supposed public support for the technology.
Davis added that while he believes “digitising health data is a good idea, … it can only be allowed with strong safeguards preventing misuse—not just by the state, but by private companies and criminals.”
One of the most important safeguards would be to prevent data from being sold to companies in the first place.
The report stressed that the data stored on patient passports “should be owned by patients,” and that “people should be able to see who has been looking at their information.” Times reporters also hailed the idea of a “strong political appetite for the reforms,” particularly in the Labour party. This technocratic and ‘data-driven’ approach to policy is one that will requires public caution, independently of how well the NHS is performing.
