UK MPs Approve Compulsory ID Cards

Idimmu Xul writes "BBC News is reporting that the UK House of Commons has approved legislation making identity cards compulsory." From the article: "The plans, rejected by peers last month, will now go back before the House of Lords. Tories warned of "creeping compulsion" and Lib Dems said the "fight against compulsory ID cards" would go on."

Comments

Is it 1984 yet?

[Tackhead]

> "I think we've won the argument on it. People have this idea that there's a problem in civil liberties with people having an identity card and an identity registered today when across all walks of our life this is happening.
>
> "And with the real problems people have today with identity fraud, which is a major, major issue; illegal immigration; organised crime: it's just the sensible thing to do."

Because having an identity card - that you have to carry with you at all times - is the sensible solution to the problem of identity theft. Because we all know that nothing you carry with you 24/7/365 can ever be stolen.

"I tell you, freedom and human rights in America are doomed. The US Government will lead the American people - and the West in general - into an unbearable hell and a choking life."

- Osama bin Goldstein, ca. November 2001

Re:Is it 1984 yet?

[Tackhead]

> Having your identity card stolen != having your identity stolen.

Neither is having your driver's license, credit card, bank statement, passport, or social security number stolen. Any one of the above would make for a pretty fucking good starting point for an identity thief, though.

Kindly explain to me how putting all of the above onto the same card makes it harder, instead of easier, for an identity thief to do his work.

Well, not quite

[Spad]

To be fair, in order for them to become compulsory, they'll have to go back and get legislation passed through both houses. Of course, anyone who gets their passport renewed will be required to get an ID card anyway (which in the UK is a large percentage of the population) so they'll be compulsory in everything but name.

Either way, it's a massive blow for civil rights in this country - they'll be storing obscene amounts of personal information, including the buzz-word of the moment, 'biometrics' in a central database that will need to be accessable by essentially every government department. Given this government's record for IT projects, I'm almost looking forward to the ID cards being introduced just to see how spectacularly the whole system fails.

Re:Well, not quite

[kraut]

As a German living in the UK for far too long, I'll happily sue each of these companies.

>"As of 1 July 2008, we will only serve alcohol to people who can produce ID, regardless of their apparent age. The only acceptable form of ID is a UK ID card or passport".
Here's my EU passport. Will you serve me my lukewarm cervisia, or should I sue you for racial discrimination?

>"As of 1 July 2008, this company will be taking positive steps to ensure illegal immirants aren't employed. To that end, anyone applying for a job must show a UK ID card before they will be offered a role".
Any reputable company already takes a copy of your entitlement to work in the UK - i.e. passport or EU ID card. Or foreign passport and work visa.

> "In order to combat Identity Theft, as of 1 July 2008, you will be required to show your ID card when paying by debit/credit card".
Pull the other one, it's got bells on.
In big shops in the UK, you can pay for £0.20 worth of chewing gum on your credit card if you want; they're not going to want to ask for your ID. Why would they? Together with the banks they've just swapped the "If we can't prove you made the payement, you're not liable" system for the "If someone can observe or guess your 4 digit pin, you're fucked" chip and pin system. More ID would only hurt the retailers and the banks.

"In line with Money Laundering Regulations, we will only open a bank account for people who can demonstrate their identity. As of 1 July 2008, we will only accept an ID card issued by an EU member state."
That's already pretty much the case. Of course you could get a birth certificate instead, which is obviously fairly useless. But you'll need that to get the ID card in the first place, so it's basically a coverup.

What really needs to be addressed with the UK Scheme is that:
1. It's ridiculously expensive. Whether you pay upfront or through taxes is really irrelevant.
2. It is completely ineffective against all the things it is supposed to solve:
2.1 Benefit fraud: The government admits that 95% of it is "misrepresentation of circumstances", not ID fraud. You can throw biometrics at me 'til the cows come home; if I say my back hurts you still can't prove me wrong. Until you catch me playing sqash, but ID cards don't help much on that.
2.2 Terrorism. All the tube bombers would have been able to get their squeaky clean ID cards. As would Richard Reid. Ok, so identifying bodies might be a tad quicker, so clearly that would be 19.2 billion well ( spent, Not like we need that money anywhere else.
2.3 Immigration. If you're an illegal immgrant without any documets, will you fret about not having another document? No? Exactly. Earth to Labour, Earth to Labour - bugger, they're not receiving common sense anymore.
2.4 Health Care. Health care. At the moment, if you show up at a hospital with a non-life-threating problem, it will take hours before you're seen. Fair enough, in a nasty sort of way. On the other hand, if you're actually about to die, you will get treated, with the full whack that modern medicine can deliver. And it's not cheap. I know an old gentleman of foreign extraction who managed to rack up about £40K before leaving the High Dependency Unit. Are they going to let old men die on the street for lack of ID?

Anyway, the UK government has no respect for human rights. In some former governments, that would have been expected; in a nominally labour government, it's shocking. Intercepting people's private communications without warrant; locking people up indefinitely without trial; making the political system even less accountable. Shame I can't blame them for the first past the post system, but they only benefit from it rather than introducing it. On the other hand, they repl

Bad movie script?

[Nevtje(hr]

"Sir, may I please see your ID?"

-Umm, I forgot it at home.

"Did you forget it at home or are you an illegal immigrant?"

-No, seriously, I forgot it at home!

"Right."

Officers club down suspect and drag him to jail.

I can only assume this is to counter illegal immigrants- and homeless people? Any regular citizen cannot not have an ID (job, bank transfers, rent etc).

Not to Ask For Flamebait, But...

[adavies42]

What the hell is wrong with England?!? You people invented modern democratic society and civil rights, and you've been happily flushing it down the drain, piece by piece, ever since the end of WWII. (Would you really be any worse off at this point if the Nazis had won?) Gun control, CCTV, now ID cards--every time I look at America's problems, I can always cheer myself up by remembering that whatever we're doing wrong, you're guaranteed to do something worse.

And what kind of politics have you got going now where the Conservatives are for civil liberties and Labour are the fascists? That's just bizarre.

Papers, please.

[mrchaotica]

I don't get it. Did the British learn nothing from World War II?!

Re:Only compulsory when applying for a passport

[rovingeyes]

I'd rather rephrase it like this "Actually it is only compulsory when applying for a passport. It will not be compulsory otherwise for now". Once the system is in place, its only a matter of time when it becomes common place. All they have to do is prove to public that they either caught a terrorist or prevented a subway bomb somehow. Fear is the easiest thing to sell to public.

Poor British citizens, their government's watching

[Lord Satri]

ID Cards for the Brits, wait, here's why they can get angry!

From the Association of British Drivers press release: "The EU is already planning to use Galileo to enforce continental-wide road tolling, and the car-hating British government wants to be first. You won't be able to drive anywhere without the EU knowing where you are going, who you are travelling with, and what speed you are travelling at."

Re:Am I Alone in Thinking This is a Good Thing?

[robertjw]

I'm all for anything that will stop terrorism.

Anything? How about summary executions or travel document requirements for movement between cities? Maybe you would prefer racial profiling and detention camps? Drastic enough measures will stop terrorism, but at what price?

Re:Only compulsory when applying for a passport

[NoMercy]

So, in other words, it's compulsory.

How quaint

[big c0ward]

ID cards? How pleasantly old fashioned. Wouldn't compulsory RFID implants make so much more sence?

Re:Stupid paranoia with ID cards.

[kyb]

You may find this page useful in understanding why it's perfectly reasonable to be suspicious of ID cards.

It's the nature of governments to continually increase their power, and it's the responsibility of the people to limit a governments power to the absolute minimum required to fulfill its function.

Remember as well, when you give a government that you trust powers, you aren't just giving them the powers, but also all the future governments that you may or may not trust.

Why should I need to show papers to authorities when I'm walking down the street? Is the street theirs and I get to walk on it only at their sufferance, or are they my servants that exist to make sure that I can walk down the street freely?

Re:Only compulsory when applying for a passport

[IIH]

Actually it is only compulsory when applying for a passport. It will not be compulsory otherwise.

So if you disagree with the idea, you can't even leave the country. Nice.

Re:Am I Alone in Thinking This is a Good Thing?

[isotope23]

Anything? How about summary executions or travel document requirements for movement between cities? Maybe you would prefer racial profiling and detention camps? Drastic enough measures will stop terrorism, but at what price?

Actually, I think "drastic enough" measures will increase terrorism. The harder a government clamps down, e.g. subjecting individuals to racial profiling, etc. the greater the pool of discontented and potential terrorists become. Its a positive feedback loop. The harsher they are the worse it will become.

Re:Only compulsory when applying for a passport

[Pantero Blanco]

At this point in the US, ID cards are mandatory if:

1. You want to drive.
2. You want to travel on an airplane (and most inter-city bus systems say you have to show one when asked, though they don't usually check).
3. You want to buy a firearm or ammunition (in most states).
4. You want to cash a check (read: get paid).
5. You want to pay for anything with a check or credit card (and places that sell expensive items don't always accept cash!).
6. You want to enroll in school.
7. You want to buy cigarettes or alcohol.
8. You want to get an ID (Yes, really, even if this isn't exactly what the law says. I've been through this).

I'd say that's pretty damn compulsory.

bit sensationalist...

[spacefiddle]

Article clearly states, right of the bat, that it's when you apply for a passport. So that's a point against hysterics.

However, it also states "...and will be put on a registry," so might as well leave the 1984 alarm running. Let's see:

Some random thoughts, concerns, questions for the crowd and more than a bit of polemic inspired by this latest tidbit in the Tony Loves George show:

This is effing ridiculous. Why not just rebuild the Berlin Wall, only turn the gun towers around t'other way? As Carmichael says in the linked article, "the only way to opt of the system is to give up your right to travel abroad."

Here's another amusing bit:

"Tony Blair was not able to attend the debate after his plane was grounded by engine troubles in South Africa."

Is this "engine trouble, wink wink nudge nudge"? He still found the time to utter that gem about it being "just sensible," and never mind all this Liberty rubbish... but maybe they felt it'd be easier to pass along without him there for opposition to focus against... or maybe he just didn't feel like getting yelled at today :D.

(Before you object to any of the above speculation, please convince me that at any given moment, a plane actually cannot be found for the Prime Minister of Anywhere, and it is more secure to be a known grounded sitting duck? Right. If so, fire your entire staff now please, your life is in grave danger...)

Anyway. Interesting that the US and the UK are making two halves of the citizen lockdown; we talk about a US ID card, but first went ahead with the RFID passports. The UK looks like it stands a good chance of having the ID cards first. From there, it's pretty easy for each to point to the "success" of the other, and respectively pass their missing halves. Yum, compulsory RFID Citizen Cards.

Do you have a reason for crossing the border, Comrade? Why did you spend 3 hours at that truck stop, Comrade? Did you know you've been travelling with an Enemy of the State, Comrade? Please step out of the car now, Comrade.

Think that's BS? I wish. Sadly, only when more and more people who consider themselves the "normal" folks are being stopped and searched will they start to realize that maybe this isn't Liberty after all - if, of course, they haven't completed their indoctrinations into thinking it is.

As long as it looks like just black-wearing tattoed freaks and foreginers are being harassed, that's still Liberty, right?

Final, desperate plea/question to those who still doubt how this is going: Since when, in the history of Ever, has information been collected and compiled - and not used? Since when has power been sought and gained - and not abused? Explain to me how, exactly, you can collect and correlate so much data on so many private citizens with increasingly efficient and effective means of making it meaningful, finally - but when it comes to suspect uses of that information, oh don't worry, just trust them with no accountability or oversight.

"They wouldn't do that! They're the good guys!"

someone kindly wake up the great sleeping mass in the center of the country - they're used up all their Snooze button hits already.

Re:Only compulsory when applying for a passport

[askegg]

I don't know what it's like in the UK, but in in Australia a passport is considered a very good means of identification. Of course this raises the question of how to I provide enough evidence to prove who I am in order to obtain a passport? Making a identification card compulsory add another layer - now how do I prove who I am in order to obtain an identification card so I can get a passport (no, you can't use your passport)?

The ultimate question is: How can you *prove* who you are?

In the end it comes down to webs of trust.

Of course, all of this misses the point. Are these measures meant to make us safer? From what? Terrorism? The guys who blew themselves up on the London undeground and on the buses were not hiding their identities. They were British citizens and in walked freely.

How does a compulsory id card to obtain a passport (which is already compulsory for travel) going to prevent this?

Re:Why the fuss?

[N1AK]

Take a look at what is happening in Zimbabwe if they find out you vote against Mugabe's party. How about what happened to the Jews because the Nazi's knew there religion. Or how about Cambodia where the wrong shape head could get you killed? This isn't a Utopia, thing about how the information could be used in good times and in bad.

What's depressing about your point of view, is your think everyone is being worried for no reason. Simply because you didn't take the time, or use your brain to think things through.

Re:enumeration by the state?

[Pig Hogger]

The census is enumeration.
The national health number is enumeration.
My passport is enumeration.

The census is not tied to your identification.
The national health number is not for identification, but for health-care purposes.

What problem is it that the id card is supposed to solve?

The absence of a warm and fuzzy feeling towards security? The lack of control by politicians?

Missed the point

[lga]

The scary thing about this is not the card itself, it is the database that will be set up.

The bill calls for an Identity Register that will contain not only all of the information that is provided at signup, along with biometric identifiers such as fingerprints and iris scans, but also a record of every access of that information. Think about this - the database will know that your identity was checked by the doctor, the hospital, leaving the country, maybe even your bank or your employer. A corrupt official with access to this information could build up one hell of a profile about you. Got nothing to hide? Are you sure? This database could unocover whatever it is that you don't think you have to hide.

Before this bill there were specific laws that prevented government departments from sharing information in their databases because of potential abuse of it by government or otherwise. The Identity Cards bill demolishes those laws and establishes a database containing all of the information that was previously scattered around and impossible to link, and it shares that database with every government department there is.

A few months ago I pledged that I would not sign up for an ID card and that I would give money to fight it in court. Given that Passports renewed after 2008 will be accompanied by an ID card, the question I now have to answer is whether I should renew my passport 5 years early to avoid registration, or if I should become one of the first cases to fight in court as far as I can.

Re:Why the fuss?

[crabpeople]

"I personally don't have a problem if a someone knows who many times I day I shit, what kind of tea I buy, what party I vote, etc. so I have real trouble comprehending this strange fear"

Please kindly reply to this comment with the following:

1) your full name and home address
2) a history of your shopping record, including times and dates so i can pattern match to see when your most likely to be not at home
3) Detailed purchase information from your local big box store so that when i come to your house and murder your wife, i can do it with a recently purchased like model knife or blunt object.

Honestly, the only people who are for mass databases really have no imgination.

Of course they will make ID cards compulsary

[Garry Anderson]

As I wrote on another forum: they will make ID cards compulsary by clever manipulation of thicko MP's and public.

At the time it is brought back to Parliament for compulsion, they will say, "The many billions we have spent so far is wasted and ID cards are not fully effective - unless the database is complete with entire population - as the thieves and terrorists are not registering".

You can see it coming a mile away.

http://www.hosted-forum.com/index.php?boardid=notn ews&showtopic=671&st=0&#entry16962

Re:Excuse the ignorance of an ex-colonist...

[kraut]

I do wonder.... sometimes I think Tony just turned coat completely - imagine you voted for Amnesty International, and when they get into power they turn into Pinochet..... other times, you think, Cherie is a human rights lawyer who makes a lot of money out of sueing the UK government for trampling on human rights. Either they are maximising the family income, or they must have interesting dinner table conversations.

Either way, Tony's government position on human rights and civil liberties makes Margaret Thatcher and Michael Howard look like a bunch of bleeding hippies, which is quite an achievement.

Oh, and the trains still don't run on time. At least Mussolini managed to get that done.

Re:Reasoned arguments against this

[Builder]

Here are some of my issues with this scheme...

1. I've heard a lot about WHAT this card would do, but no HOW. Apparently this will stop illegal immigration. How? Most employers of illegal immigrants are in on it anyway, so this won't stop them. Apparently his will stop terrorism. How? The bombers on 7/7/2005 all used their own identities. The bombers in Madrid all had ID cards. Apparently this will combat crime. How? If they are so sure of this, why don't the police commit to an X% reduction in specific kinds of crime over a certain period?

2. The government refuse to be transparant about the costs. Their argument for ID cards is that if you have nothing to hide then you won't mind having one. On this basis, they MUST have something to hide.

3. The card is backed by a database containing all of your information. This WILL be used inappropriately. Even if you totally trust our current government (in which case, please contact me ASAP - I have this money from this deceased dictator that I need to move and only you can help!), by agreeing to this, you agree to trust every future government from now onwards to not abuse this system. Just see the illicit and immoral investigation into the lady who led the action group for rail crash victims. With all of this data in one place, it will be easier for them to run these 'dirty tricks' campaigns, and we are less likely to find out about them because with less places to look, there will be fewer leaks.

4. When I lose a number, I can get a new one. When I lose the digital representation of my right index finger, I can't get a new one. So if the data that represents my finger is compromised and used by someone else, how do I combat that ?

5. If I lose a finger, am I going to be treated as a pariah because I can no longer use your official identity scheme? Will I be treated with suspicion by know-nothing till operator morons who think I lopped my finger off just to beat their system? My wife recently lost a digit in an accident, and just travelling to the US while her hand was bandaged (lost finger, multiple stitches across hand) became a nightmare. I've never seen anyone treated so badly in my life, and I've spent time behind a South African police station counter.

6. Many experts in various intelligence, military and criminal fields have made public statements that this card will not address the issues that the government will say it will. Who should I believe? Experts who have proved themselves through their work, or MPs who lie to me about major issues on a regular basis?