Also being a part of the 14 eyes means if the United States wanted my biometrics all they need to do is ask. My country is already moving towards real time cctv identification in airports etc. using biometrics from any issued license / passport.
It does however make Facebook even harder to use for anti-government organizing, though Facebook is already pretty clear about not wanting truly anonymous profiles.
Your country must be very gullible and have poor standards of proof. Facial recognition is nowhere near capable of any such feat. Even in cases where the picture is taken under controlled circumstances, with ideal lighting, in good resolution, without extraneous background details, etc, facial recognition is still utterly terrible at matching people against a database of known images.
Tell your government to prosecute whatever contracting company lied to them and said such a thing could work for fraud and instead look into technologies that work, like those touchless optical fingerprint scanners that can take a persons prints from several feet away. Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if gait recognition had a higher ID rate than facial recognition. Prints and irises are both very good biometrics, facial is less reliable than having a schizophrenic practice phrenology on people one by one.
These cameras were 360 degree and nicely hidden away, you could zoom in and see the pimples on people across the street at decent resolution.
This was 10 years ago, betting against cameras improving since then or in future probably isn't a good idea.
Just an anecdote.
But the movement to identify and share information is not being successfully pushed by governments, but by private industry, largely for personal use. That is where my comment came from.
How I wish large scale surveillance was conspiratorial. Do you really believe in what you say or is it only habit?