Civil liberties campaign group Privacy International has been attacked by the Home Office and by London mayor Ken Livingstone's staff, for what they see as unfair criticism of their records on privacy.
Privacy International last night held a party to mark its fifth annual Big Brother awards, given to people and organisations it judges to have invaded privacy.
A representative of the Home Office attended the event, but did not take the special award for David Blunkett: a (fake) dog poo on a stick. The home secretary has been a long-time target for privacy campaigners, as a result of his support for schemes such as entitlement cards.
"These are silly and malicious awards which have rightly been ignored by most people," said a Home Office press officer. She pointed to Mr Blunkett's introduction to the consultation on revised plans for government access to communications data, such as telephone bills and email headers. The original draft order drew heavy criticism last summer.
"In withdrawing the Order, dubbed a 'Snooper's Charter' by its critics, I admitted that we had got it wrong and said that we would have to think again and consult widely before returning to Parliament with any new Order," writes Mr Blunkett.
It remains to be seen if Privacy International has damaged its credibility with the Home Office through its attack, despite Mr Blunkett's admission of error and revised plans.
In another controversial move, the group gave two Big Brothers - its standard award for those attacking privacy - to those involved with London's successful congestion charging scheme. London mayor Ken Livingstone won worst public servant award for introducing the scheme, as well as for his plans for an integrated transport smartcard.
Ian Brown, one of the judges, said the award was given because every vehicle number plate is recorded by camera. The scheme could have used a prepaid transmitter system, Mr Brown said, with cameras recording only the plates of vehicles without such cards.
"Their data protection notice says you have no privacy, and they can use the data for any crime-related or revenue purpose," he added.
But a spokesperson for the mayor defended the scheme's privacy record. "Images of vehicles for which the congestion charging has been paid are only kept for a maximum of 24 hours. Data used for monitoring random movements is kept for a maximum of one week unless scrutiny suggests that further investigation should be carried out."
He added that requests from the police or other investigators must be specific, and only for prevention and detection of crime.
Capita won the most invasive company award, for its involvement in congestion charging and also the Criminal Records Bureau - which took weeks to clear staff for sensitive jobs when opened up last year.
The Association of Chief Police Officers was branded most heinous government organisation, particularly for its promotion of data retention by telecoms and Internet service providers.
The Cabinet Office's Policy and Innovation Unit won most appalling project, for its proposal to link government databases. Tony Blair scooped the lifetime menace award. "His government has, for so long, been pushing these privacy-invasive measures," said Mr Brown. "He has to take responsibility."
Privacy International gave a Winston, aimed at recognising those who campaign for privacy rights, to Marion Chester, head of legal services for the Association of Community Health Councils of England and Wales.
Ms Chester said health may be used to introduce identity cards by the back door, through schemes such as those for joined-up mental health services. "We will have an identity scheme that is not called an identity scheme," she said.
Terri Dowty, joint national co-ordinator of the Childrens Rights Alliance for England, also won a Winston. She said the same tactic is being aimed at children, through schemes such as the school census, the Connexions advice service for teenagers and schools' use of biometric data.
Ms Dowty said children should have privacy issues explained, then have the choice not to consent to their data being used. "I'm worried that young people are getting used to having their privacy invaded from such an early age, they are being softened up, so they will accept huge invasions of their privacy later," she said.
Media activists Undercurrents, fellow privacy campaigners Stand - who run the FaxYourMP.com web-site - and Richard Norton-Taylor and Stuart Millar of the Guardian also received Winstons, along with a posthumous award for Dr Roger Needham.
Privacy International has previously held the Big Brother awards in a lecture theatre at the London School of Economics. But this year it threw a low-key party in a London pub.
Ian Brown said this was because, last year, representatives of a rival campaign group attacked two winners of Winstons at an open post-event party. David Shayler, the now-imprisoned MI5 whistleblower, got a custard pie in his face, while Stephen Robinson, of the Daily Telegraph, had a drink poured over him.
"We weren't going to change who we gave the awards to, to satisfy some small group," said Mr Brown. Instead, the organisers increased the privacy of the event.
