The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Good reasons to reject ID Cards > Comments

Good reasons to reject ID Cards : Comments

By Alexander Deane, published 16/3/2005

Alexander Deane argues ID cards are an expensive nuisance with little value in the war against terror.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. All
Mr Deane makles some good points, lucidly.

There is however one significant error of fact: "The declared cost of the UK scheme is £50 billion." It isn't. Government estimates are vague and evasive. There's not really a declared cost at all.

What we do have is a declaration from the Home Office (whose pet scheme it is) in the Regulatory Impact Assessment that accompanies the bill that the cost to the budget of the Home Office and its agencies of setting up the scheme will be a minimum of £5.5 billion over 10 years. This estimate is up from £3.1 billion six months ago, and the scheme has, as far as we can tell, yet to be specified in any meaningful detail. (Most of the plans are secret. The legislation would give the Home Secretary the power to change the future shape and application of the scheme by regulation.)

Worse, that wild guess is only for the Home Office's costs. It neglects the costs to other government departments, local authorities and businesses, all of whom will have to modify their systems to cope with state ID-control. It ignores the costs to individuals of attending registration interviews and re-registration interviews every time a card is lost. It ignores the cost of policing the system, which would be borne by the local police authorities. There is no attempt to account for the costs of failures in the system to any of these other parties.

£50 billion may in fact be nearer the mark, but the government isn't saying. (It has striven to avoid engaging with its critics on any point.) The economic costs are quite literally incalculable at this stage.

Guy Herbert
General Secretary, NO2ID Campaign
London
Posted by Gesh, Wednesday, 16 March 2005 6:31:35 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Mr. Deane rightly highlights how the National ID number could be used to link together Government databases. But he omits to mention that within a few years the ID number will be recorded in a plethora of private and commercial databases too, including banking and insurance, local (as well as national) government, employment, education, telephone companies and ISPs.

The consequence of using a (Government guaranteed) unique key to link these databases is almost unimaginable. A the "touch of a button an individual's life history (or "whole life audit" in the preferred language of the UK Home Office) will be available on the screen.

Nothing will be shielded from prying eyes. Nothing will be forgotten, let alone forgiven. Unless of course you are a member of the political elite, who's records will mysteriously be inaccessible.
Posted by Columbarius, Thursday, 17 March 2005 1:52:46 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well said both Gesh and Columbarius, I fear we will be ID'd by stealth anyway via our tax file numbers.

I agree with Deane that visitors on temporary visas would be exempt from the scheme and of course free to cause what ever mayhem they have planned. The real issue is the cause of terrorism - mostly poverty. The western world really need to address the imbalance of wealth and power, however, I am probably being too idealistic.

In the mean time we apply band aid solutions such as ID cards and slowly curtail our own democratic freedom. As Deane stated can we be positive in trusting any future governments?
Posted by Ringtail, Friday, 18 March 2005 5:11:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The new legislation to implement the usage of ID cards in the United Kingdom serves as a means of the Government and its citizenry knowing who is legally entitled to work and enjoy the benefits supplied by the various institutions within the United Kingdom - ranging from NHS to the Dole and beyond. Is it indeed a foolproof method of rooting out the criminal element from within society, by making it insuperable for those rogue elements to fake residence/citizenship and thereby enjoying the aforementioned benefits of life in the UK? Is it an effective data-logging method of knowing exactly who is employed where and when and having an entirely new system implemented to allow authorities to extract highly intrusive information from anyone at any time? It is indeed a violation of civil liberties if government abuses this very privilege and it is indeed a means of eradicating those who are not allowed to be residing and earning in the UK. The cost is certainly extortionary and restrictive, one feels that taxpayer money can indeed be better spent elsewhere. Food for thought...
Posted by Brett Chatz, Saturday, 19 March 2005 3:19:04 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
There are benefits to the individual in having a secure, safe, reliable, single electronic identity. The difficulty has always been that institutions - such as governments and business - worry about what is good for them instead of thinking about what is good for the individual.

There is a way to keep our data in separate silos, to easily protect ourselves from identity fraud and easily find out what information others are keeping on us. The same approach can also assure institutions that information we give them is correct.

The solution is simple and is all about control. If we give control to the individual and make them responsible for their own identities then we also get the benefits to the individual that arises from a single form of authenticated identity. To show how it works then consider logging on to your bank account. If instead of putting in your user code/password to the bank you put in your user code and the bank calls you and asks you if you want to access your data. You confirm using either your voice print or a pin. This now allows you access to the data.

Providing the bank knows that the information you give them is true and correct and that you can be contacted in the event of a dispute then they do not need to know who you are or what your true identity is.

All problems of identity fraud and phish attacks go away.

Translate this idea to every institution or organisation. They can conduct business with you but do not need to know who you are provided they can be assured that the information they need to have is true and you can be contacted in the event of a dispute.

We are currently working on building such a scheme and we are happy to discuss with those interested.
Posted by Fickle Pickle, Monday, 21 March 2005 2:45:36 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
There is a case for giving individuals a mechanism enabling them to establish their identity securely and accurately. I have spent some time thinking about how a scheme could be made acceptable to civil libertarians (of which I am one). In essence, the card, the number, and the register entry must belong to the individual, not the state and I have developed a draft protocol which reflects this, published at http://www.no2id.net/forum/viewtopic.php?t=336 (no space to include it in this forum).

Assuming (big question mark) that the technology works, these rules ensure that it is much harder to link databases, because the key data element (the NIRN) is not known to anyone, nonetheless there is “absolute assurance” (card fraud excepted) that the person in front of the requestor is indeed who they claim to be. The requestor can tick the box labelled “ID confirmed”, and record the permitted information, but nothing more.

If implemented, these proposals would allay many fears, and severely restrict function creep, and growing state surveillance. But if the Home Office has no secret agenda, and is simply looking to verify and individual’s ID where does it go wrong?
Posted by Columbarius, Monday, 21 March 2005 8:25:28 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Of course, individual liberty is something that we should all be privy too, but the state must go to some lengths to ensure that the liberty, to all and intense of purposes is maintained.
Whilst Alex's articulate argument has some solid foundations, it may have skirted or side-stepped some issues.
Firstly let us not look on the ID card as ONLY a proposed deterrent against terrorism. Is this the only crime in the UK that we should be vigilant against? Think of the number of crimes that happen within the UK that don't make international or even national headlines. Gangland or racial attacks etc. The family of a person killed in a terrorist attack would make headlines, however a person killed in a drunken brawl would make fish and chip wrapping. What's the difference to the families involved?...None
Terrorism, granted is a more global and widespread threat, however these street crimes are rising at an alarming rate.
From an administrative point of view then yes, it would be an expensive cost, but you don't get anything for nothing. Of course, it would have to be a complex system but in a society of ever advancing technology, this would hardly be a groundbreaking feat, at least not for long.
We put our faith in these systems already. Are we paying the right amount of income tax and NI contributions, is our council tax up to date, has a work visa expired, are we receiving the correct pension benefits? These are all systems that could break down.
Finally, yes this is the state infringing on our rights. But if all it takes is for the state to run through my details for a milli-second in an attempt to locate a criminal then I am happy for them to do so. Let's face it, if you have nothing to hide then you won't even be aware it's taking place and the long term results in policing crime would be dramatically reduced.
Let's take care of crime on our doorstep first, then we are in a better position to deal with more widespread issues.
Posted by Renny Biggins, Friday, 17 June 2005 7:38:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy