National ID cards - good idea?

[drat01]

[........ no matter how much your Stalinist buddies try to make it so.

I took you for better than that, but hey ho

[snowychap]

...

Your expected use of the DNA is an interesting one. So you are saying that the data will be used by outside companies? Is this happening now with data stored on the DNA database? Are the DNA samples of convicted Paedo's etc being used to determine the makeup of a child abuser? Is the DNA of mass killers beings used to determine who the next Mr Wright of Ipswich will be?

....

I'm interested, going back to these questions, what your answers to your own questions are.

Are you comfortable with the idea of analysis of genes in order to predertimine those who might have a tendency to a particular type of behaviour and prejudge them?

If so - what is the next step on that road?

What do you do with this information?

Are people then categorised according to their genetic make-up?

On the wider question:

What do you see as the raison d'être of the DNA database?

Is it to improve detection rates for criminal activities or to protect the public or both or something else?

Does the principle of proportionate response have any relevance to the database?

If the argument for a universal DNA database is predicated upon the principle that prevention and detection of crime is king, then all sense of whether it is proportionate is irrelevant.

We are then only in the position of finding the most effective method and system for achieving those ends and anything that gets in the way of those ends is at best a distraction.

That being so - there is no point in drawing any line beyond which we will not cross.

Ergo we have our justification for either pharmaceutical or genetic control of actions, thoughts and behaviour or the necessity to ask permission from authorities to act or behave in a particular way (that is otherwise not proscribed).

[Gringo]

Thin edge of the wedge

Foreigners face fines over ID cards

Foreign nationals living in Britain who boycott the introduction of the biometric identity card later this year could face losing their right to stay, under proposals published yesterday.

A Home Office consultation paper also reveals that those who refuse to make or turn up to an appointment to scan their fingerprints and facial image will face a £250 fine, rising to £1,000 for persistent refusal. Those who fail to tell police if they lose their ID card will face a fine of £125.

The sanctions regime proposed for the compulsory ID card for foreign nationals, which comes into effect from November, is expected to be a pilot for the UK residents' ID cards to be introduced from next year.

The Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman, Chris Huhne, said: "This shows the kind of punitive measures that every British citizen can expect when ID cards are eventually rolled out nationally."

I can really see the plod leading roman abramovich, lakshmi mittal and al fayed, being led off to deportation centres, nah thought not. Divisive law, and divisive implementation.

How are they going to check out the non-dom's to see if they've got an ID card. "Oi you look a bit foreign, got an ID card"? Obviously that wouldn't work, so it would make it much easier to make it compulsory for everyone in the country, and watch the fines roll in, kerching.

[snowychap]

Well - I could see them dragging Al Fayed off occasionally.

How can they know they'll be fining the right people if they haven't got their ID card to prove to the authorities who they are?

[Gringo]

Well of course, if you can't provide an ID card on the spot and claim to be a UK (or EU citizen - not sure how this will work just yet) then they will demand you turn up at a police station and provide your UK passport or similar proof of entitlement within 14 days. And when John/Paul/Richard Smith/Brown/Humprhies fails to turn up it can be marked down as another closed case.

How can you make one set of society compulsorily carry cards and enforce it, when the rest of society don't have to carry cards.

Is this the worst legislation ever?

[snowychap]

Well of course, if you can't provide an ID card on the spot and claim to be a UK (or EU citizen - not sure how this will work just yet) then they will demand you turn up at a police station and provide your UK passport or similar proof of entitlement within 14 days. And when John/Paul/Richard Smith/Brown/Humprhies fails to turn up it can be marked down as another closed case.

How can you make one set of society compulsorily carry cards and enforce it, when the rest of society don't have to carry cards.

Is this the worst legislation ever?

I don't think it is the worst piece ever.

It's not even the worst piece for which this current government is responsible.

As pointed out by me on other legislation in other threads it is up against pretty serious competition.

On forcing one section of society to carry and produce on demand ID cards/documents/passes - I'd say:

South Africa

Germany in 1939 (mentioned with a sly acknowledgement of Godwin's law) but I'm not sure whether that was a card only applying to Jews or a universal card with an identification of ones Jewishness on cards

[Risso]

It's not THE worst idea I've heard of, but it's close. The only argument I've read in favour of them is that they might not be as bad as people think.

Just about every other so called reason for introducing them has been debunked.

So in answer to the thread title, "no".

[blandy]

And back to DNA, the Leading Article in the Indie today

makes some very good points

Yesterday, the first shots were fired in a battle that will ultimately determine whether we in Britain are innocent until proven guilty, as we like to imagine, or whether we are a nation of suspects. Two British men have argued before the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg that the decision by the UK police to retain their DNA on a national database, despite the fact that they are entirely innocent of any crime, is a breach of their right to privacy. But this case is about much more than the rights of two men. It concerns the liberty of us all.

Since a change in the law in 2001, the police have been routinely fingerprinting and taking DNA samples from everyone they arrest - regardless of age, the seriousness of the alleged offence, or even whether the suspect is subsequently convicted. The result is that the police have collected some 4.5 million profiles and Britain has the largest per capita DNA database in the world. Ethnic minorities are vastly over-represented in its records. It is estimated that the DNA of some 40 per cent of the black male UK population is contained on the database.

No one would dispute that forensic DNA technology has an important role to play in crime prevention and clear-up. Some recent high-profile cases over the past two weeks have been ample evidence of that. The case against Steve Wright, who murdered five women in Suffolk, and Mark Dixie, who killed Sally Anne Bowman in Surrey, were both bolstered considerably by DNA evidence. It is reasonable that the DNA of convicted criminals should be retained by the police for future reference.

But the state has no right whatsoever to hold the information of the innocent. Nor should they be allowed to retain the DNA records of children convicted of a crime after they reach adulthood. In the name of making us safer, the police have decided that we are all potential suspects and that they have the right to hold the DNA of anyone they see fit. It is an outrageous infringement on our privacy.

The two plaintiffs in Strasbourg have a powerful case. Yet what is truly staggering is that, far from conceding that they have gone too far, the police are calling for an extension of the database to cover the entire population. The officer who led the Sally Anne Bowman murder investigation claims that a universal database would have enabled the police to catch Dixie "within 24 hours". Yet it is hard not to detect a desire for an easier life behind such lobbying. It is instructive to examine the case of another murderer convicted this week. Levi Bellfield was reported to the police 93 times for offences ranging from indecent assault to obscene phone calls, yet was not arrested until he had killed twice. Rather than lobbying for yet more rights to demand our DNA, the police should be concentrating on doing their existing job better.

It is a small mercy that the Home Office claimed last weekend that it has no plans to introduce a universal database. The enthusiasm of Tony Blair for such a scheme, thankfully, does not seem to have survived his departure from office. But that does not alter the fact that ministers and MPs alike have turned a blind eye to the massive and unjustified growth of the database.

Last month, Gordon Brown ordered one of his trademark reviews into the scheme. But that will not report until next year. And the privacy of our own biometric information is not an issue that can be kicked into the long grass. Until our political representatives begin to demand that the police end their practice of harvesting DNA samples at will, their claims to be upholding our liberty deserve to be met with a contemptuous laugh.

[snowychap]

Minister to update ID card plans

Non-EU migrants, baggage handlers and students will be the first to receive identity cards, the Home Secretary Jacqui Smith will announce later.

Ms Smith will tell the Commons that foreign national workers from outside the European Union will be the first to be issued with cards this year.

In 2009, cards will be issued to up to 100,000 airport workers, while in 2010, students will be offered them.

Both the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats are opposed to ID cards.

Receptive minds

The cards will be compulsory for foreign nationals and those working airside in Britain's airports, such as baggage handlers and cabin crew.

The rollout to students, is, according to BBC political reporter Norman Smith, part of a government strategy to offer cards to those most willing to accept them.

He says the thinking is that younger people will be more receptive to carry ID cards, because they will make it easier to open a bank account.

One suggestion is that they could be used instead of a passport for travel within the European Union. Such a scheme already exists for most other EU citizens.

Fingerprint tells all

The government's plans for ID cards, linking personal data to a fingerprint, have been plagued by technical delays, budget overspend and political controversy.

The government claims identity cards will boost security, tackle identity fraud and prevent illegal immigration.

Critics oppose the cards on cost, effectiveness and civil liberty grounds.

Government sources have suggested that the next groups to be offered ID cards will be those working in sensitive roles or locations.

It is thought these could include people not just with security related jobs, but also those involved in caring for children.

But some security experts stress that those convicted of terrorism in recent years were never involved with identity fraud.

Prime Minister Gordon Brown hinted earlier this year that the scheme may not be compulsory for UK nationals but suggestions of a U-turn were denied.

Former Home Secretary David Blunkett, who introduced the initial identity card scheme, has previously said it would not work unless everyone had to have a card.

Shadow home secretary David Davis expressed concern about having an identity card database.

"The national identity register, which will contain dozens of personal details of every adult in this country in one place, will be a severe threat to our security and a real target for criminals, hackers and terrorists," he said.

"This is before you take the government's legendary inability to handle people's data securely into account."

C'mon, students. Pull your fingers out and reject this 'offer'.

[snowychap]

So the plans aren't quite working out as it would have seemed.

I am interested that it is suggested that a few British nationals who WORK in a certain place will be forced to have an ID card. I wonder if they can bin it/burn it/cut it up when they change their jobs?

WARNING : DO NOT EXPECT THE TIMETABLE BELOW TO BE ANYMORE ACCURATE THAN A GWR TIMETABLE.

Rethink on identity cards plans

ID CARDS TIMETABLE

2008 - Compulsory for non-EU nationals

2009 - Compulsory for 200,000 UK citizens and EU nationals who work in 'sensitive' airport jobs

2010 - Voluntary scheme for students

2011/12 - Biometric passports issued, applicants can choose to get ID card

2017 - Full roll-out of identity cards

The government has set out changes to its planned identity scheme - including allowing people to use new "biometric" passports instead of getting ID cards.

Most people will not now have to give their fingerprints when getting a passport until 2011/12 - three years later than had previously been planned.

And plans to force passport applicants to get an ID card have been dropped.

The exception will be airport and other workers in security-sensitive jobs who will need an ID card from 2009.

Home Secretary Jacqui Smith said students would also be encouraged to get identity cards from 2010, as part of plans to let "consumer demand" drive take-up.

Ms Smith confirmed that non-EU migrants applying for leave to enter or remain in the UK will need ID cards from November. The aim is that by 2015, 90% of foreign nationals will have identity cards, she added.

The announcement was branded a "complete U-turn" by Lib Dem home affairs spokesman Chris Huhne - but anti-ID card campaigners warned the government was trying to introduce the scheme by stealth.

The government had previously planned to take biometrics - including all 10 fingerprints - of everyone applying for a new passport from 2008.

'Public acceptance'

The proposal had been that from January 2010 everyone getting, or renewing, a passport would have to get an identity card in addition to a passport.

And ex-Prime Minister Tony Blair had said that a major plank of Labour's next election manifesto would be a bill to make it compulsory for everyone, irrespective of whether they get a passport or not, to get an ID card.

But those timetables have slipped and Ms Smith says most people will not have to get an identity card and could use their biometric passport instead to prove who they are.

"While there are big advantages to making ID cards as widespread as possible, we need to be clear there is public acceptance," she told BBC Radio 4's Today programme.

"We need to be clear that the technology is there and, of course, Parliament would have the final decision as to whether or not, and when, entry on the identity register became compulsory."

Ms Smith stressed that information on the national identity register would not be held on a single, central database for security reasons.

Private firms

In a speech in London, she said the first Britons to get the ID cards will be those working airside in Britain's airports, such as baggage handlers and cabin crew.

She also announced a rollout to students - with the thinking being that they will be the most willing to accept them as they could help students do things such as open bank accounts.

She said she expected the "full roll-out" of ID cards would happen by 2017.

Private firms will be encouraged to set-up "biometric enrolment centres" where passport and ID card applicants will be fingerprinted.

'Dangerous core'

The government's plans for ID cards, linking personal data to a fingerprint, have been plagued by technical delays, budget overspend and political controversy.

The government claims identity cards will boost security, tackle identity fraud and prevent illegal immigration.

Critics oppose the cards on cost, effectiveness and civil liberty grounds.

Shadow home secretary David Davis said: "The government may have removed the highly visible element but they have still left the dangerous core of this project.

"The National Identity Register, which will contain dozens of personal details of every adult in this country in one place, will be a severe threat to our security and a real target for criminals, hackers and terrorists.

"This is before you take the government's legendary inability to handle people's data securely into account."

Phil Booth, of campaign group NO2ID dismissed Ms Smith's latest announcement as a "marketing exercise" designed to introduce ID cards by stealth.

"Whether you volunteer or are coerced onto the ID database, there's no way back. You'll be monitored for life. That's why the government is targeting students and young people, to get them on before they realise what's happening," he said.

Former Home Secretary David Blunkett, who introduced the initial identity card scheme, has previously said it would not work unless everyone had to have a card.

[tonyh29]

no mention of who will be paying for these ID cards ... but I bet I can hazard a guess

But does it matter what timetable they put up , everyone knows they aer gone at the next election , the publice don't trust them , don't like their arrogance they are non electable for maybe 15 years on the back of the damage done by Blair and Brown

I'm still waiting for someone to enlighten me though as to how a ID card will stop British citizens blowing themselves up on tubes and buses ??

[bickster]

I'm still waiting for someone to enlighten me though as to how a ID card will stop British citizens blowing themselves up on tubes and buses ??

You wait about as long as you will for a number 29 bus of a wet weekend

[snowychap]

no mention of who will be paying for these ID cards ... but I bet I can hazard a guess

But does it matter what timetable they put up , everyone knows they aer gone at the next election , the publice don't trust them , don't like their arrogance they are non electable for maybe 15 years on the back of the damage done by Blair and Brown

I'm still waiting for someone to enlighten me though as to how a ID card will stop British citizens blowing themselves up on tubes and buses ??

I'd imagine there will be a contribution from those non-eu nationals and those firms employing people at the airports for the cards themselves.

As for the National Register database: yes, HM taxpayer will be coughing up for that one.

If a database is up and running when there is a change of party in power, I don't think the newbies will be rushing to get rid of it (whatever their pledge).

[Gringo]

Rethink on identity cards plans

The updated plans look remarkably like those leaked by the highly impartial no2id group.

C'mon, students. Pull your fingers out and reject this 'offer'.

The ID cards will help students as without one you won't be able to get a student loan or open a bank account (unless you've already got a bank account and/or electricity/gas bills in your name). Purely optional of course.

[Gringo]

I'm still waiting for someone to enlighten me though as to how a ID card will stop British citizens blowing themselves up on tubes and buses ??

Do keep up tony, ID cards are nothing to do with terrorism, it's all about identity theft and benefit fraud.

[tonyh29]

Do keep up tony, ID cards are nothing to do with terrorism, it's all about identity theft and benefit fraud.

my bad ..well what if i promise not to partake in either of these crimes ..can i get away without having an ID card then ?

[ahamaad]

I wonder if the recent very public cock ups in relation to personal details being 'lost' will have any bearing on these proposals?

[snowychap]

C'mon, students. Pull your fingers out and reject this 'offer'.

The ID cards will help students as without one you won't be able to get a student loan or open a bank account (unless you've already got a bank account and/or electricity/gas bills in your name). Purely optional of course.

I know this has been touted as a possible means of getting the majority, if not all, students to get one but I'd like to see the law that is going to back that up.

It'll probably be made to be very difficult to get one but not impossible. It will depend on how much effort students are willing to put in to help fight this cobblers.

[snowychap]

Do keep up tony, ID cards are nothing to do with terrorism, it's all about identity theft and benefit fraud.

my bad ..well what if i promise not to partake in either of these crimes ..can i get away without having an ID card then ?

Only if you can prove that the promise is, in fact, coming from you and that you are genuinely who you say you are - or you might be promising on behalf of the person who you are pretending to be.

[tonyh29]

much effort students are willing to put in

and herein is the first flaw in your plan :-)

Only if you can prove that the promise is, in fact, coming from you and that you are genuinely who you say you are - or you might be promising on behalf of the person who you are pretending to be.

:-)