id cards

[Istenem]

not sure whether this is wholly accurate but it makes for uncomfortable: reading:

Dear all
Please circulate it to as many friends as possible.
There's a lot of this kind of legislation going on at the moment that needs to be more widely known and resisted.


This was written originally by Francis Stonor Saunders the former arts editor of The New Statesman, author of The Cultural Cold War, Diabolical Englishman and The Devil’s Broker and was awarded the Royal Historical Society's William Gladstone Memorial Prize. She lives in London.
"You may have heard that legislation creating compulsory ID Cards passed a crucial stage in the House of Commons. You may feel that ID cards are not something to worry about, since we already have Photo ID for our Passport and Driving License and an ID Card will be no different to that. What you have not been told is the full scope of this proposed ID Card, and what it will mean to you personally.
< /P>

The proposed ID Card will be different from any card you now hold. It will be connected to a database called the NIR, (National Identity Register), where all of your personal details will be stored. This will include the unique number that will be issued to you, your fingerprints, a scan of the back of your eye, and your photograph. Your name, address and date of birth will also obviously be stored there.

There will be spaces on this database for your religion, residence status, and many other private and personal facts about you. There is unlimited space for every other details of your life on the NIR database, which can be expanded by the Government with or without further Acts of Parliament.
By itself, you might think that this register is harmless, but you would be wrong to come to this conclusion. This new card will be used to check your identity against your entry in the register in real time,
whenever you present it to 'prove who you are'.
Every place that sells alcohol or cigarettes, every post office, every pharmacy, and every Bank will have an NIR Card Terminal, (very much like the Chip and Pin Readers that are everywhere now) into which your card can be 'swiped' to check your identity. Each time this happens, a record is made at the NIR of the time and place that the Card was presented. This means for example, that there will be a government record of every time you withdraw more than £99 at your branch of NatWest, who now demand ID for these transactions. Every time you have to prove that you are over 18, your card will be swiped, and a record made at the NIR. Restaurants and off licenses will demand that your card is swiped so that each receipt shows that they sold alcohol to someone over 18, and that this was proved by the access to the NIR, indemnifying them from prosecution.

Private businesses are going to be given access to the NIR Database. If you want to apply for a job, you will have to present your card for a swipe. If you want to apply for a London Underground Oyster Card, or a supermarket loyalty card, or a driving license you will have to present your ID Card for a swipe. The same goes for getting a telephone line or a mobile phone or an internet account.
Oyster, DVLA, BT and Nectar (for example) all run very detailed databases of their own. They will be allowed access to the NIR, just as every other business will be. This means that each of these
entities will be able to store your unique number in their database, and place all your travel, phone records, driving activities and detailed shopping habits under your unique NIR number. These databases, which can easily fit on a storage device the size of your hand, will be sold to third parties either legally or illegally. It will then be possible for a non-governmental entity to create a detailed dossier of all your activities. Certainly, the government will have clandestine access to all of them, meaning that they will have a complete record of all your movements, from how much and when you withdraw from your bank account to what medications you are taking, down to the level of what sort of bread you eat - all accessible via a single unique number in a central database.
This is quite a significant leap from a simple ID Card that shows your name and face.
Most people do not know that this is the true character and scope of the proposed ID Card. Whenever the details of how it will work are explained to them, they quickly change from being ambivalent towards it.
The Government is going to COMPEL you to enter your details into the NIR and to carry this card. If you and your children want to obtain or renew your passports, you will be forced to have your fingerprints taken and your eyes scanned for the NIR, and an ID Card will be issued to you whether you want one or not. If you refuse to be fingerprinted and eye scanned, you will not be able to get a passport. Your ID Card will, just like your passport, not be your property. The Home Secretary will have the right to revoke or suspend your ID at any time, meaning that you will not be able to withdraw money from your Bank Account, for example, or do anything that requires you to present your government issued ID Card.
The arguments that have been put forwarded in favour of ID Cards can be easily disproved. ID Cards WILL NOT stop terrorists; every Spaniard has a compulsory ID Card as did the Madrid Bombers. ID Cards will not 'eliminate benefit fraud', which in comparison, is small compared to the astronomical cost of this proposal, which will be measured in billions according to the LSE (London School of Economics). This scheme exists solely to exert total surveillance and control over the ordinary free British Citizen, and it will line the pockets of the companies that will create the computer systems at the expense of your freedom, privacy and money.
If you did not know the full scope of the proposed ID Card Scheme before and you are as unsettled as I am at what it really means to you, to this country and its way of life, I urge you to email or photocopy this and give it to your friends and colleagues and everyone else you think should know and who cares. The Bill has proceeded to this stage due to the lack of accurate and complete information on this proposal being made public. Together & hand in hand, we can inform the entire nation if everyone who receives this passes it on."

[Mattb]

Hmm....i'm always sceptical of stuff like this until it gets official coverage from somewhere like the BBC.
I'm not paying £90 for a card that has an iris scan and fingerprint on it anyway. I normally take my eyes and hands out with me so what's the point! :P

[Cardinal Sin]

Without wanting to sound too cynical, I wouldn't accept everything the BBC says as being wholly impartial.

The BBC needs to stay in the Government's good books in order to maintain its funding through the TV licence fee.

The Government need to stay in the BBC's good books so that they are portrayed in a sympathetic light through the BBC's broadcasting.

It's certainly a cosy arrangement that they have. For recent evidence, you need look no further than recent BBC coverage of goings-on in Iran (not just the nuclear issue). This coming at the same time that America, and consequently Britain, are trying to drum-up interest in possible military action against Iran. The same thing happened a few years ago with Iraq - remember all the stories about WMDs in Iraq? Where did all these stories originate from?

Don't forget, the BBC's board of governors are appointed by the Government.

I'm not saying everything the BBC prints is lies, or that there is a conspiracy to hoodwink the Great British public. But just remember that for contentious issues such as ID cards, you might find that even the BBC does not tell you the full story.

[Mattb]

Yeah of course Rich. Certainly a "I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine" relationship. But then again, the BBC hasn't got the reputation as the worlds best for nothing. Over a third of its website hits are from outside the UK which tells you something, while BBC online is the 20th busiest website on the net....and the only news site in the top 20, which ain't bad for a small country like the UK. Its ahead of CNN, which you'd imagine would be busier serving the whole of the USA.
I can see why they'd hide things such as this though, if the stuff unknown has put here is true and got a general public release, it would mean a lot of uproar i'm sure. Something the melting Labour party could do without

Just out of interest, where'd you get the piece from unknown?

Matt

[Istenem]

in my job i get things like this. it was from a reliable source but he is prone to sensationalisation occasionally. i think everyone except blunkett is against this but too idle to do anything until government have filibustered it through.

[Cardinal Sin]

I agree with what you're saying Matt, but just because the BBC is popular does not mean it's impartial. The Sun is the most popular newspaper in Britain, but that is no indication if its trustworthiness. The BBC has built up its (mostly deserved) reputation for over half a century, and citizens of other countries turn to the BBC simply because the standard of reporting in their own countries is so poor / biased.

Here's another article about ID cards, written by the respected (by some) journalist, John Pilger:

John Pilger | April 14 2006

People ask: Can this be happening in Britain? Surely not. A centuries-old democratic constitution cannot be swept away. Basic human rights cannot be made abstract Those who once comforted themselves that a Labour government would never commit such an epic crime in Iraq might now abandon a last delusion, that their freedom is inviolable. If they knew.

The dying of freedom in Britain is not news. The pirouettes of ambition of the prime minister and his political twin, the treasurer, are news, though of minimal public interest. Looking back to the 1930s when social democracies were distracted and powerful cliques imposed their totalitarian ways by stealth and silence, the warning is clear. The Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill has already passed its second parliamentary reading without interest to most Labour MPs and court journalists; yet it is utterly totalitarian in scope.

Presented by the government as a simple measure for streamlining deregulation, or "getting rid of red tape," the only red tape it will actually remove is that of parliamentary scrutiny of government legislation, including this remarkable bill. It will mean that the government can secretly change the Parliament Act and the constitution and laws can be struck down by decree from Downing Street. Blair has demonstrated his taste for absolute power in his abuse of the royal prerogative, which he has used to bypass parliament in going to war and in dismissing landmark High Court judgments, such as that which declared illegal the expulsion of the entire population of the Chagos islands, now the site of an American military base. The new bill marks the end of true parliamentary democracy; in its effect, it is as significant as the US Congress last year abandoning the bill of rights.

Those who fail to hear these steps on the road to dictatorship should look at the government's plans for ID cards, described in its manifesto as "voluntary." They will be compulsory and worse. An ID card will be different from a driving license or passport. It will be connected to a database called the NIR (National Identity Register), where your personal details will be stored. These will include your fingerprints, a scan of your iris, your residence status and unlimited other details about your life. If you fail to keep an appointment to be photographed and fingerprinted, you can be fined up to £2,500.

Every place that sells alcohol or cigarettes, every post office, every pharmacy and every bank will have an NIR terminal where you can be asked to "prove who you are." Each time you swipe it, a record is made at the NIR. This means that the government will know every time you withdraw more than £99 from your bank account. Restaurants and off-licenses (liquor stores) will demand that the card is swiped so that they are indemnified from prosecution. Private business will have full access to the NIR. If you apply for a job, your card will have to be swiped. If you want a London Underground Oyster card, or a supermarket loyalty card, or a telephone line or a mobile phone or an Internet account, your card will have to be swiped.

In other words, there will be a record of your movements, your phone records and shopping habits, even the kind of medication you take.

These databases, which can be stored in a device the size of a hand, will be sold to third parties without you knowing. The ID card will not be your property and the Home Secretary will have the right to revoke or suspend it at any time without explanation. This would prevent you drawing money from a bank. ID cards will not stop or deter terrorists, as Home Secretary Charles Clarke has now admitted; the Madrid bombers all carried ID. On 26 March, the government silenced the last parliamentary opposition to the cards when it ruled that the House of Lords could no longer block legislation contained in a party's manifesto. The Blair clique does not debate. Like the zealot in Downing Street, its "sincere belief" in its own veracity is quite enough. When the London School of Economics published a long study that effectively demolished the government's case for the cards, Charles Clarke abused it for feeding a "media scare campaign." This is the same minister who attended every cabinet meeting at which Blair's lies over his decision to invade Iraq were clear.

This government was reelected with the support of barely a fifth of those eligible to vote: the second lowest since the franchise. Whatever respectability the famous suits in television studios try to give him, Blair is demonstrably discredited as a liar and war criminal. Like the constitution-hijacking bill now reaching its final stages, and the criminalizing of peaceful protest, ID cards are designed to control the lives of ordinary citizens (as well as enrich the new Labour-favoured companies that will build the computer systems). A small, determined, and profoundly undemocratic group is killing freedom in Britain, just as it has killed literally in Iraq. That is the news. "The kaleidoscope has been shaken," said Blair at the 2001 Labour Party conference. "The pieces are in flux. Soon they will settle again. Before they do, let us reorder this world around us."

[Mattb]

....who works for the Daily Mirror

I'm sure you're also aware of what scientists recommend....never stare directly at the sun! I'd even go so far as to say people who buy it don't even buy it for the news content. A bit of a red herring really. It's more food for the moronic than anything else.

I'd also agree with you about all these corrupt countries resulting in their people turning here for news. That only highlights the quality of the content to me. Anyway, enough ramblings about the BBC and its reliability. ID cards? Worst idea for many-a-year.

Matt

[Cardinal Sin]

John Pilger is freelance these days, he writes pieces in the New Statesmen every fortnight. The Sun is trashy reading, but you're quite right that it's not really news as such. I used to read it regularly until I found out what a cvnt Rupert Murdoch is.

Just had a thought, Unknownpseudonym is a freelance journalist who is opposed to ID cards. John Pilger is a freelance journalist who is opposed to ID cards.

Could they be one and the same?

[Istenem]

good sleuthing Your Eminence. but no. i wouldn't mind some of his money though

[Cardinal Sin]

ah rats, back to the drawing board.

So when ID cards are made compulsory, will your name appear as Fifone Bronxcheer? And beside your biometric information, will there just be a big question mark?

[Istenem]

i'm certainly going to oppose this but it is not the sort of thing which would go to a referendum partly because of the obvious and widespread unpopularity.
i use pseudonyms for work too my real name is in the john smith realm of ordinariness and i hardly do any freelance any more.

as for the biometrics; (assuming john pilger's sources were accurate) fining £2,500 seems to be an extraordinarily heavy-handed way to regulate what we have been told is a civil/national benefit. government is up to something and the public suspect it's not cricket.
on an unrelated point i am already paying stealth tax for their olympics which we didn't want and the dome fiasco which we didn't want.