This Google thing has fuck all to do with care.data - they're totally separate.
I understand "the" NHS is complex, but it's pretty frustrating talking to someone who has very strong opinions and who clearly doesn't know what they're talking about.
It's really weird to link to a document that talks about the severe legal penalties for anyone who attempts to de-anonymise the data, and then use that to say "look how flimsy these agreements are!", especially when the document you link to has a BOLD lead saying that things are even stricter in the newer document.
> The politician provides the initial promises
Again, not a politician. Chief data officer at NHS England, and a real doctor. http://www.nuffieldtrust.org.uk/about/our-people/dr-geraint-...
> The problem with psuedonymous data is the NHS basically admits it can be used to identify people given sufficient effort.
It's trivially easy for Google to do this already without the NHS data, and they don't face prison time for doing it. See all the pregnant teens outed by supermarket loyalty cards for other examples.