Slashdot Mirror
UK Government Passes ID Card Bill
cowbutt writes "The two houses of the UK government, the elected House of Commons and the House of Lords have agreed a compromise on Labour's ID cards bill, after Conservative peers accepted a Labour amendment. Under the new amendment, anyone renewing a designated document (e.g. passport) will be able to opt-out of getting a card until 2010, but will still have their details put on the National ID Register immediately."
Get stuffed number 6.
Living in Northern Ireland, with dual nationality I'll be going for an Irish passport, instead of a British one. If a British Driving license is a "designated document", I might just have to shenanigan enough to be able to get an Irish Driving license too, come renewal time.
"Never 'clear the air'. Instead, investigate all the subtle nuances of the word 'fester'." - R. Candappa
What data will ID cards store?
Fears have been raised by opponents of identity cards about the amount of information which could be stored on the database. Here is the full list of the 49 types of information which the Identity Cards Bill says should be on the register.
Personal information
* full name
* other names by which person is or has been known
* date of birth
* place of birth
* gender
* address of principal place of residence in the United Kingdom
* the address of every other place in the United Kingdom where person has a place of residence.
Identifying information
* a photograph of head and shoulders
* signature
* fingerprints
* other biometric information
Residential status
* nationality
* entitlement to remain in the United Kingdom where that entitlement derives from a grant of leave to enter or remain in the United Kingdom, the terms and conditions of that leave
Personal reference numbers
* National Identity Registration Number
* the number of any ID card issued
* allocated national insurance number
* the number of any relevant immigration document
* the number of their United Kingdom passport
* the number of any passport issued to the individual by or on behalf of the authorities of a country or territory outside the United Kingdom or by or on behalf of an international organisation
* the number of any document that can be used by them (in some or all circumstances) instead of a passport;
* the number of any identity card issued to him/her by the authorities of a country or territory outside the United Kingdom
* any reference number allocated to him/her by the secretary of state in connection with an application made by him for permission to enter or to remain in the United Kingdom
* the number of any work permit relating to him/her;
* any driver number given to him/her by a driving licence;
* the number of any designated document which is held by him/her and is a document the number of which does not fall within any of the preceding sub-paragraphs
* the date of expiry or period of validity of a document the number of which is recorded by virtue of this paragraph.
Record history
* information falling within the preceding paragraphs that has previously been recorded about him/her in the Register
* particulars of changes affecting that information and of changes made to his/her entry in the Register
* date of death.
Registration and ID card history
* the date of every application for registration made by him/her
* the date of every application by him/her for a modification of the contents of his entry
* the date of every application by him/her confirming the contents of his entry (with or without changes)
* the reason for any omission from the information recorded in his/her entry
* particulars (in addition to its number) of every ID card issued to him/her
* whether each such card is in force and, if not, why not
Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
> This is going to cost the government some money. That money comes from taxes and fees. What is the British citizen getting for that expense?
Screwed.
It's a huge expense, with no discernible benefit in the areas it's touted against - Immigration, Terrorism, Benefit Fraud. At the risk of repeating myself, but in the vain hope that MPs who clearly have trouble following a simple logical argument may understand, let's break it down:
* Immigration:
a) You get across the border with your foreign passport. ID cards don't help.
b) In a country where, when you get stopped by the police while driving, you have a choice of going to a police station of your convenience within 7 days to show your driving license and insurance details or simply giving a fake name and address, what chance do you have of people actually carrying the ID around? And if you don't get arrested for not having it, it will be ineffective.
* Terrorism:
AFAIK, nobody who has or has attempted to commit an act of terrorism in the UK in history, including Guy Fawkews, would have had a problem getting an ID card. So the net effect on terrorism will be - zilch. nada. nothing. nichts. zero.
* Benefit Fraud:
IIRC, benefit fraud is estimated at GBP 2 billion p.a., and according to government figures, in excess of 95% of that is "misrepresentation of circumstances" (a.k.a. as "my bad back stops me working, but doesn't trouble me on the golf course"). And ID card will help in that area by....magically diagnosing fake back pain? Sounding alarm sirens on malingerers? No, they will help - not at all. So we'll spend at least 8 billion on the governments own estimate to combat 5% of 2billion... Even Gordon Brown should be able to spot the flaw in THAT argument.
Now, if the government does something so patently nonsensical, one has to suspect them of terminal stupidity or having ulterior motives. Neither is a pleasant explanation.
What really galls me about this is how they've threatened the House of Lords, which has done an admirable job of protecting us, even if it's clearly fighting a loosing battle. The irritating thing is that Tony and his Cronies claim to have a democratic mandate; and while the Lords, of course, traditionally lack a democratic mandate, at least they, unlike the PM, weren't actively opposed by two thirds of the voters.
The bottom line is that Tony and his Cronies have comprehensively fucked us over. And unlike George W, they don't even have the excuse of not knowing any better. But they got into power on the premise of protecting human rights, introducing freedom of information, and making the country more democratic; let's not mention of sorting out the health service and education, since they have patently failed on those.
Yes, they introduced a human rights act, only to "opt out" of the important bits as soon as they could; all the terrorism legislation they have introduced has shown that - a lot of them being lawyers - they either slept through the human rights lessons, or just don't give a fuck about people. The latter is more likely, although of course there's the third alternative: Tony creates patently illegal legislation, and Chery and Matrix chambers take the government to court, creating a perpetual money machine for the Blair family. Of course that would be far too sinister for reality, but Dan Brown might take this theory into account for his next plagiarism trial )
They did introduce a freedom of information act. With all the relevant teeth removed. "Commercial Sensitivity" is apparently a valid reason for not giving information. Excuse me, but if you're spending MY tax money I have a right to know how.
They promised to reform the unelected House of Lords. Yes, they did, but by replacing most of the hereditary peers with a bunch of people appointed by an "indepenedent" commitee appointed by the government. Who's going to be more independent, the great-great
no taxation without representation!