Identity cards

[Tom]

What are your thoughts on these? Personally I'm all against them. Not for any 'big brother' reasons, but mainly because they will instantly put a stop to any independant investigations by the press into institutions within this country.

Imagine, no more insider exclusives from people infiltrating the police and exposing corruption, no more expose's of government departments. Can you imagine how difficult it would have been to produce the recent BBC program about racism in the police if everybody had an National ID card? It would be impossible.

I think not only are they bad in principle for democracy, they are an attempt by our government to subjugate our population. Why do we need them anyway? To increase security? Pull the other one. Would one of these cards stop an IRA bomber parking a truck full of explosives in Manchester? If passports aren't good enough to stop hijackers from taking aircraft, then why not simply upgrade the passport itself?

 

[Paradroid]

Ahem.

Remember I've posted before that I work for a central gov. dept? Guess which one?

 

[Gengi]

MI6, or is that a red herring ?

 

[Paradroid]

What are your thoughts on these? Personally I'm all against them. Not for any 'big brother' reasons, but mainly because they will instantly put a stop to any independant investigations by the press into institutions within this country.

I don't really agree with this point, I don't see how it will stop independant investigations - but you clarify this next...

Imagine, no more insider exclusives from people infiltrating the police and exposing corruption, no more expose's of government departments. Can you imagine how difficult it would have been to produce the recent BBC program about racism in the police if everybody had an National ID card? It would be impossible.

I'd agree that it makes it more difficult, but not impossible. It would need to be more of a deep-cover operation - probably relying on non-journo's providing info. Which takes me to a point I was thinking about: wasn't the recent revelations (not the racist police) by a whistle-blower? I think you'd be relying more heavily on the integrity of civil servants - and hope you get more whistle-blowers in the future. But with a 25 year jail sentance hanging over your head for breaking the official secrets act, I honestly don't know how many people would sacrifice, not only their careers, but also potentially a large chunk of their lives. It will probably stop the kind of thing we saw with the undercover airport security TV program that was on recently (but their investigators were supposed to vet the new recruits properly, so...).

I think not only are they bad in principle for democracy, they are an attempt by our government to subjugate our population. Why do we need them anyway? To increase security? Pull the other one. Would one of these cards stop an IRA bomber parking a truck full of explosives in Manchester? If passports aren't good enough to stop hijackers from taking aircraft, then why not simply upgrade the passport itself?

I remember a time when Biometrics and ID cards created a healthy debate and there were no definative answers. After 911, all that has changed (handy, wasn't it?).

I can't really give out any detailed info about this, but Passports are being upgraded (to include Biometrics), at the insistance of US immigration - the rest of the EU and Commonwealth countries will follow in time, no doubt.

Remember the whole principle behind the ID cards shouldn't be anything for the "honest Joe" to worry about. It's intention is to help prevent fraud, and there is a lot of fraud at the moment that we can't really do anything about - because all the info systems aren't joined-up enough. A good example might be the whole debacle over who owns (or sold) the BarrysWorld domain. If everyone had ID cards there wouldn't have been any doubt as to who paid for what & when.

We all know benefit fraud is massive in this country, that alone should be reason enough to introduce this scheme (from a financial point of view at least). Passport fraud takes us into whole new dimensions - with a Passport you can get anything (mortgage, loans etc) - nationality can then be passed onto future generations, who can then legitimately claim benefits...it's a can or fraudulent worms that needs to be closed.

In the future all honest citizens will have a facility which makes it easier for them to book/purchase goods & services, employers can rely on the info supplied that who they're hiring actually are who they say they are (paedo's in childcare anyone?). It should make criminal activities more difficult, and honest activities more easy.

So, yeah, getting back to the original example, a journalist going undercover in a covert operation to exploit a company or gov. dept. sounds good. But you're relying on the integrity of the person who's circumventing the system - in the case of the journalist, it's for a noble cause. But if a journalist can do it, then a criminal can do it for personal gain.


Discuss...

 

[Deebs]

My take on it is this:

If it makes the world a better place, do it.
If it makes Britain a better place, do it quicker.
If it stops criminals from doing things or makes it harder, do it.
If it stops wankers claiming from the social thus making me pay more, do it quicker.

etc etc etc etc

Tbh, I am not really worried about undercover journalists. They obv show weaknesses which are then "plugged". This just makes their job more harder, not stop them.

Anyway, coffee on my desk is getting cold

 

[Damini]

I think a far more pressing issue to be resolved is that of illegal immigration, not because of any rah rah they're taking our jobs kind of thing, but because if the government really wants to know who we are:

Maybe it should stop letting people in all the time in the back of lorries, or staying after a holiday, and having no idea who they are? If you or I commit a crime, we have a birth certificate, a national insurance number, a documented history of who we are and where we live. Even the joe criminal blogs down the road has this. However, if you turn up in the back of a lorry and stay here, or claim asylum, nobody knows who you are. It's customary for people to actually burn their documentation before they claim asylum, because it helps their case (and can also help claim they are from a different country and have a different name).I don't see what damned right the government has to cite terrorism as a cause to push ahead id cards, whilst simultaneously letting all and sundry enter our country and stay here, whilst not finding out who they are. We are an island for crying out loud.

Summary: id cards are all very well, but frankly offensive to propose whilst we don't have secure borders. What will they do with all the illegal immigrants who can't get cards? Lock them up? HAH. There isn't a prison big enough. Give them a card that relates to their new identity they claimed to have when entering the country? Great way to make fraud easy. It's just bull. Again, if the country really cared who we were, then we wouldn't have the immigration problem we do.

 

[SheepCow]

I don't mind them in principle, I'd just like to know that all the data the gov. stores on me isn't used for dodgey purposes.

 

[maxi]

They will be forged (estmated timescale of this is around 6-8 months of forgers getting a hold of the technology)

So if they are forged (guarentee, pretty much) and they are seen as the be all and end all of identification(overblown statement) then what if someone commits a crime and using the ID card system it's traced back to THEM only it wasn't them, it was someone with a forgery.


lets not forget the Government hasn't been able to impliment any of its IT projects properly..ever and they've albeen around 1/3 or less the size of this one. The chance it'll work properly without their being bugs that will threaten the data(the stuff that says who you are), etc are slim.

My take on it is this:

If it makes the world a better place, do it.
If it makes Britain a better place, do it quicker.

That simple is it? how will it make the world a better place?

If it stops criminals from doing things or makes it harder, do it.

IF it works, short term yes. long term it'll be just like it is now.

If it stops wankers claiming from the social thus making me pay more, do it quicker.

Except it probably won't and you're already paying more to try and impliment the Orwellian freak scary Big Brother behemoth.

I pretty much agree with what Tom said, and add the part that I don't think it'll work either. As well as the security issues. If it's going to be implimented fully if ID card checks will be instant, say a copper pulls you over and swipes your card, How is that data going to get from Cop#1 to CentralDB instantly without security risks?(if Cop#1s machine has access, why can't HackerTerr0rist1 get access too?) and if it isn't instant...well...the flaws are obvious

 

[Clown]

As long as it's free, I don't care.
I don't care about carrying some little peice of plastic with me, and if someone wants to look at it, so what?

 

[maxi]

Because they can monitor what you do, where you go, where you ARE. That's your CHOICE not mine, just because you refuse to think about the implications for longer than 30seconds does't mean i should suffer for it. there should be choice at least.

It#s free like the roads and public transport are free.

rollseyes etc.

 

[throdgrain]

ID cards dont bother me in the slightest. Bring em on I say.

 

[nath]

ID Cards don't bother me either, if they're introduced I doubt they'll affect me much at all. If I'm ok with it, so should everyone else be.

 

[Frizz]

To me, ID cards would just replace my drivers license when i'm out on the piss.

 

[Driwen]

Because they can monitor what you do, where you go, where you ARE. That's your CHOICE not mine, just because you refuse to think about the implications for longer than 30seconds does't mean i should suffer for it. there should be choice at least.

exactly how does the ID card limit your freedom or hurt you? You can still go where ever you want, do whatever you want (well atleast with the same limitations), however they can see what you are doing though. Allthough you cant really keep track of millions of people at once, so I think it will only be used to see what you did after they have a reason to check up on you (meaning they think you are going to break the law/broke the law).

 

[FuzzyLogic]

It's all part of Echelon I tell you...ECHELON!



BIOMETRIC ID CARDS ARE PEOPLE!!1

 

[Milkshake]

I'm not quite sure yet. I see all the "good" things, and I think....wow, why didn't we do it before?

Then I think of all the bad things, and I think...mmph...

I guess I'd be for it, but I don't know enough yet. I think the problem would be making sure the information was not abused. Nail that, and it's a cracking good idea.

 

[Catsby]

Catsby has nothing to hide.

And Catsby does not think that anyone is claiming ID cards will cure all ills. But if it reduces the estimate of benefit Fraud from 1.5 billion pounds to anything less, Catsby is happy that the money can be wasted elsewhere.

 

[GekuL]

"They" have far more important things to worry about than what I (number: 340957 to them) get up to. So I'm not really bothered.

 

[TdC]

I'm not bothered tbh. "They" know exactly who I am, I'm registered, cross-referenced, marked up and keyed in to several databases. Another card to carry will not change that. Personally I can only see advantages. BigBrother has known about me all my life, he's known the day I was born, where I've been, what my income and output is and he will know the day I am dead. Free and anonymous? Sure, I can be, I just have to get more creative at how I attempt it.

 

[Clown]

Because they can monitor what you do, where you go, where you ARE.

So what if they know where I am? Are they going to find me and say hi? So what if they know where I've been?

So what?

 

[Tom]

During the eighties there was a department of special branch specifically created to follow 'subversive' types. People such as Arthur Scargill and even ex-labour mps had their every movement followed, because the government of the day believed them to be a threat to parlimentary democracy.

Whats to stop the data gathered with ID cards from being used in a similar way? What if you went on a demonstration against government policy (eg poll tax), and this data was available to the police? What if this data was then used to create a map of the UK, showing the locations of potential troublespots, and government policy was altered specifically to reduce the threat of unrest?

I really don't see a need for a centralised ID card. What will it do that we can't already achieve? Regarding dole cheats, how on earth is this going to stop people from working 'cash-in-hand' and claiming dole? Of course, its not.

Its a waste of money, a waste of our money.

 

[Paradroid]

ID cards will save the treasury money - which can be spent elsewhere (schools, hospitals). We already have the infrastructure and knowledge to get ID cards going - it's not going to cost more money than they save.

The techology is pretty fekin advanced, it not going to be 100% secure (where there's a will, there's a way - and all that), but it'll stop the casual fraudsters instantly - leaving only the hardcore "lifer" criminals to battle with the tech companies. If I wanted to commit benefit fraud (or many other types of fraud) at the moment, I could. It's currently at my discretion. With ID cards it would be difficult (back to the hardcore criminals), if not impossible for the "ordinary Joe".

I agree that the use of said info is a talking point (everyone seen that java scenario? - where the guy try's to get insurance and is turned down for various "big brother/business" reasons, a bit like the Gataca story-line). If we all sat back and "hoped" that nothing Dickensian will transpire in the future - then, yeah, we'd all be royal feked over by big business. So we need provisions in place to secure the use of all this data (I'm looking to the EU for that - not holding my breath that the UK gov. will champion any human rights issues surrounding this).

It's all part of Echelon I tell you...ECHELON!



BIOMETRIC ID CARDS ARE PEOPLE!!1

I wouldn't be surprised if all this fed into Echelon, but that runs independently...they already know everything that the ID cards would hold - plus lots more!



Years ago when I first heard of this we'd stick a block of text as a sig to every email (full of gov. project names - code words etc), so as to deliberately flag-up every email for scrutiny (the idea being if everyone did this the whole system would bottle-neck)...but with advances in tech it probably doesn't matter anymore...

 

[Paradroid]

...
Regarding dole cheats, how on earth is this going to stop people from working 'cash-in-hand' and claiming dole? Of course, its not.

Its a waste of money, a waste of our money.

People could obviously still work for "cash-in-hand", but how much "going-out" isn't going to tally with how much is "coming-in" - the system will work much better when every payment is via plastic - no more cash.

 

[nath]

It amazes me to see you of all people saying this, Paradroid.

 

[inactionman]

ID cards will save the treasury money - which can be spent elsewhere (schools, hospitals). We already have the infrastructure and knowledge to get ID cards going - it's not going to cost more money than they save.

I feel the force is strong in you, are you the apprentice of darth blunkett?

The techology is pretty fekin advanced, it not going to be 100% secure (where there's a will, there's a way - and all that), but it'll stop the casual fraudsters instantly - leaving only the hardcore "lifer" criminals to battle with the tech companies. If I wanted to commit benefit fraud (or many other types of fraud) at the moment, I could. It's currently at my discretion. With ID cards it would be difficult (back to the hardcore criminals), if not impossible for the "ordinary Joe".

The whole thing is a huge white elephant, I should know I work in info-sec in government, and lets face it the track record for major IT projects is dire! Not a single high-profile project delivered on time, on budget, or on spec! Plus it's not going to *actually* do what they say they want it to do, it's just another tool for 'nanny-state Britain', where nanny knows best! It's not as if it will:

Cut terrorism, it's not as if the sept 11th highjackers had genuine ID is it???

Cut benefit fraud, it's only as strong as the original ID you use to get it, which, lets face it, is pretty poor in the uk!

Actually, enough of this, here's a section of what I wrote to my MP about it, who's Labour, agree's with me, and will be voting against the ID card bill:

* Who will be able to demand to see an ID card and under what circumstances
* Whether the ownership of ID cards will be compulsory
* Whether the carrying of ID cards will be compulsory
* If all parties asking for ID cards will be able to see all of the information held on the card or system
* If a card holding citizen will have the ability to view their personal data held on the ID card system
* If the information held on such a system will be accessible to those without computers and those requiring assister's technologies
* If the citizen will be able to demand the correction of any misleading or incorrect data held on the ID card system
* How will the centralised database necessary to operate the ID card system be supervised
* If there will be data on the ID card system to which the citizen does not have access
* If the citizen will have the ability to track the usage of their ID card
* The ability of the government to track ID card usage
* If data will be shared between government departments and commercial organisations
* If personal data will be exported from the country and hence out of the remit of the Data Protection Act; of particular importance is if the information is to be exported to the USA, where such information has been sold on to commercial organisations in the past
* What protections will be put in place to prevent any "function creep"; where the ID card system is later used in situations where it was not envisioned to when it was created
* What protections will be put in place to prevent abuse of the ID card system by future administrations
* What protections will be put in place to prevent official abuse of the ID card system

My major area of work is in information sharing between public sector organisations, and none of my colleagues, that I've spoken to (with a conference every 3 months or so it's a lot), think one monolithic database is a good idea, too big a target, too much chance for something to go wrong, too much chance of function creep. Besides we already have 2 national ID databases in the uk, the NHS one and the DWP one.

 

[Jonaldo]

No-one has of yet posted any valid reasons as to not having them implemented. They won't be tracking me everywhere as to what some people are making out they will do like some big brother scheme, and I'm not too bothered as to what the difference is whether someone asks me for ID and I hand them a drivers license or an ID card. It's all the same shit and for the vast majority of the population we won't notice the difference.

Those who would notice them would be immigrants, criminals, dole cheats, etcetera.

 

[nath]

As inactionman put it, I'm most worried about function creep.

 

[Paradroid]

I feel the force is strong in you, are you the apprentice of darth blunkett?

heh, darth Blunkett!

No! I'm merely presenting the potentially positive points of ID cards! (with a side-note of caution)...

The whole thing is a huge white elephant, I should know I work in info-sec in government, and lets face it the track record for major IT projects is dire! Not a single high-profile project delivered on time, on budget, or on spec! Plus it's not going to *actually* do what they say they want it to do, it's just another tool for 'nanny-state Britain', where nanny knows best!

It's true that every major IT project has been badly handled (I eagerly criticise the "decisions" made - much to the annoyance of my boss(s)) - I often think it's one or two glass's of port too many during a business lunch with corporate sales sharks! (heh)

Plus it's not going to *actually* do what they say they want it to do, it's just another tool for 'nanny-state Britain', where nanny knows best!

It'll probably be a phased-integrated programme - so it may well be many years before it has the technological & political clout to actually deliver.

It's not as if it will:

Cut terrorism, it's not as if the sept 11th highjackers had genuine ID is it???

Cut benefit fraud, it's only as strong as the original ID you use to get it, which, lets face it, is pretty poor in the uk!

It probably won't cut terrorism (might break-up a few sibling groups), but I never said that it would (did the gov.? I've no idea if that's on their wish-list!). The ID cards won't rely on any previous methods of confirming ID - a bill with your address on it won't be "cutting the mustard".

Actually, enough of this, here's a section of what I wrote to my MP about it, who's Labour, agree's with me, and will be voting against the ID card bill:
....

So we need provisions in place to secure the use of all this data (I'm looking to the EU for that - not holding my breath that the UK gov. will champion any human rights issues surrounding this).

...I hope you and your MP get some answers/solutions. But doesn't the current Data Protection Act, and, the forthcoming Freedom of Information Act cover a few of the points? I agree that it'd be worrying if a private company could get hold of the info...but I'm repeating myself.

My major area of work is in information sharing between public sector organisations, and none of my colleagues, that I've spoken to (with a conference every 3 months or so it's a lot), think one monolithic database is a good idea, too big a target, too much chance for something to go wrong, too much chance of function creep. Besides we already have 2 national ID databases in the uk, the NHS one and the DWP one.

I recently worked alongside some consultants from Equifax (internal project - sounds like you work for them or a similar company!) and I've worked with consultants regarding our data management...erm, the idea of having one monolithic database is a bad idea, but what about a data warehousing model with a consolidated view? Also, you mentioned the existance of 2 national ID databases (that you know of), will they not flow the info if (and when) legally obliged? It's just a matter of joining them up. (at ten times the cost, and effort, originally specced - no doubt)


I'm changing my name to Gullibliod!

 

[Paradroid]

As inactionman put it, I'm most worried about function creep.

So am I, but I'm taking extra vitamins just in case.

 

[Gengi]

People could obviously still work for "cash-in-hand", but how much "going-out" isn't going to tally with how much is "coming-in" - the system will work much better when every payment is via plastic - no more cash.

This would be one of the few things I have against an ID card. I don't care if they know where I am, they can find that out easily by following my 'plastic' trail. I don't have a driving liscense so a card would save me hassle when proof of identity was required. I would object though, to that amount of scrutiny, the incommings and outgoings, where I spent it, what I spent it on, who could the government sell that info to and for how much?
I pop out one morning, and decide to buy a 'Trotsky Daily' which because we have no cash I have to swipe my plastic through the paper sellers gizmo. Now as I swipe in a flag is sent up, subversive radical left wing periodical bought by citezen 1245789. A couple of hours later outside the footie match I buy 'Neonazi News' for the contrast and compare experience, again a flag goes up, citizen 1245789 is buying more radical publications. I then go and get shitfaced, team lost at footie, citizen 1245789 is buying excessive alcohol, cross check his vehicle make sure it is not being used. (from the use of GPS monitors in cars to track mileage and make the road tax dependant on usage, that has been suggested as a fairer way of charging motorists tax)

This I would object too.

A card that had your pic on it and a fingerprint or an Iris scan, fine. the technology exixts for checking fingerprints almost immediately, that could be databased quite easily I would imagine (are the Americains not doing that now for all visitors to the USA ? ) or an Iris scanner at the bank/benefits office/Airport would be fine. I as citizen 1245789 have my picture and fingerprint/iris pattern on file and this card says its me, no more information is required on the card. Just a picture and a unique way of identity. Why would the card need to say where I lived ? what my blood group was ? what my marital status is ? how many children do I have ? and quite a few other bits of information I have seen various people want to tag on to the 'ID' card.

This card would be fine.

I hope that made sense

Later