ID CARDS

Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6
 

The UK could "sleepwalk into a surveillance society" as a result of ID cards and other plans, UK information commissioner Richard Thomas has warned. He said he had concerns about how much information would be collected and shared under the ID card plans. Mr Thomas also suggested he was uneasy about plans for a population register and a database of every child. Mr Thomas says, although he is not for or against an ID card scheme itself, he is concerned about the government's failure to spell out their exact purpose.

He said, "My anxiety is that we don't sleepwalk into a surveillance society where much more information is collected about people, accessible to far more people shared across many more boundaries, than British society would feel comfortable with." He added, "The government has changed its line over the last two or three years as to what the card is intended for. You have to have clarity. Is it for the fight against terrorism? Is it to promote immigration control? Is it to provide access to public benefits and services?" A Home Office spokesman said the government remained committed to its plans for national identity cards which would, among other things, protect people against identity fraud and organised crime.

He said, "There will be no question of a card scheme being an infringement of human rights, protection of privacy, strict limits on the information held, its use and disclosure, and ensuring independent oversight will be built into the legislation." Mr Thomas also raised concerns about to the Citizen's Information Project, planned by the Office for National Statistics (ONS), which would create a population database for use by public services. An ONS spokeswoman said a consultation on the plans was currently being held and that nothing was set in stone.

"The population register would simply act as an index to existing records held in different databases. These records could only be linked when specifically authorised by legislation," a consultation paper on the plans says. ONS head Len Cook said the plans were an extension of the register of births, deaths and marriages and that he hoped it would enjoy the same level of trust from the public. It was about tying together information on the way people relate to government, he added. Mr Thomas also expressed concerns about a database of all children from birth to adulthood proposed in the Childrens Bill.

The proposal followed the inquiry into the death of Victoria Climbie which criticised the failure to share information about the youngster. Under the scheme, every child would have a unique number which would enable the different organisations that come into contact with children, such as social services, police and educational bodies to share information. Mr Thomas said, "There are reasons why we need to promote better information sharing where children are at risk, but whether the answer is to create a database of every child in the country should be questioned."

A Downing Street spokeswoman told reporters Mr Thomas was making an important contribution to the government's consultations over the ID cards plans. She stressed there would be guarantees to prevent "function creep" so information was not handed around government in an uncontrolled way. The assistant information commissioner, Jonathan Bamford, later reiterated Mr Thomas's concerns.

He said the different databases could "flow into each other" and provide a very detailed picture of how people live their lives. "We need to recognise that the potential's there where we build the infrastructure for a surveillance society. We need to make sure the proper safeguards are in place to make sure that it isn't used in a way that none of us wants. I don't think we can just leave that to chance," he said.

John Denham, chairman of the Home Affairs Select Committee which recently looked into the government's ID card plans, called for a powerful information commissioner to oversee the whole system. A proper piece of legislation on information sharing across goverment was needed, he said, along with a "comprehensive approach".

We've already heard that the iris-scanning equipment is useless for non-Caucasian, elderly and disabled people, and also has trouble with people who wear glasses. Now, apparently, it can't even cope with brown-eyed people. Well, that's me well and truly stuffed. I have brown eyes and glasses. Why won't they admit the damn things aren't going to work? And I don't want to hear any nonsense about their use in preventing terrorism, tell that to the survivors of the Madrid bombing. Spain has had ID cards for years. Consider how easy it is to become an untraceable terrorist.

A man goes into a shop and buys a few bags of sugar. So what? He might then pay a visit to a garden or DIY centre and buy some fertiliser, fence nails and paint. Maybe he's going to repair his garden fence, give it a lick of paint and is planning to grow his own lettuces. Or maybe he's going to empty the paint tin, convert the sugar and fertiliser into a crude but powerful explosive, and stuff that plus the nails into the empty tin, making a nail bomb.

But unless you start by assuming he's going to do all that, how the hell can you possibly KNOW? How do ID cards give you any clue as to his intent? Do you start detaining people under the Prevention of Terrorism Act on the grounds that he might do such a thing? Is everyone who buys sugar going to be stopped in the shop or supermarket and asked what they're going to use that sugar for? They can't work as terrorist deterrents unless the government assumes from the start that everyone is a potential terrorist and tracks everyone's movements, everywhere, every day. That is not why we voted them into office!

I have no intention of getting an ID card, I don't care if it becomes law or not, not even our Orwellian government can throw everyone in jail. Nor do I want to hear that fatuous, specious 'nothing to hide, nothing to fear' argument. There is everything to fear. There is a vast, qualitative difference between a desire for privacy and having something to hide, and it's about time our so-called government realised this. Anon