NO2ID

I have been been doing some thinking (not often that happens I know!). Is it possible to put together a sample "file" that has an "audit trail" about someone on on it? I know this is a long shot, but if people could be given an idea of how one of these would look, it might help them see the effect of having a card.

The "file" could even be done over a period of time and include information about how this could be linked to the database for the childrens act and the electronic patient record. And lets not forget about who would see it. If there are things that MIGHT be on it, there could be a question mark at this point so people do not get the chance to say the "file" is misleading.

It could even contain some background info about how it would not stop the stuff the goverment are claiming it would.

Is it possible to try this? Or would we be accused of trying to scare people? Or is it far to complicated?

lancaster@no2id.net

Don't see why not. But usually showing people Schedule 1 of the Bill is enough to persuade them if they are persuadable. Most people wouldn't be prepared to read something like that or think about it.



I think we are already. It should scare people, though. Unfortunately the Government is doing a very good job of scaring people [em]into[/em] the scheme, so we are probably better served by playing against that and appealing for people to consider their optopns calmly.



Not to do. But probably hard to sell. The work would only be worth doing if it were underpinning a suitably dramatic story. Expecting many people to read a fictional example at length out of mere curiosity, and then draw some conclusions from it unaided is probably unrealistic.

All our propaganda needs to proceed from the assumption the public is not interested. People need to be engaged before you can sell to them.

Perhaps a sample ID 'application' form then. It would surely resemble a bastard child of a tax return and a census form. If that doesn't scare people then I think little will. It might be worth sending it to MP's and asking them to fill it in!

BTW, I read somewhere that the it is estimated that the census only reaches around 90-92% of the population. So what hope is there of getting 100% ID coverage which is essential if any of the claims made for it have any hope of fulfillment?

Justin. Nothing to hide but my privacy.

An example audit trail is something we've discussed in the Edinburgh group.

Our thought was to have a spoof website that looked like an "official" government site but clearly set in 2025 or whatever. Show what, in theory, could be available to a civil servant by then.

Entering a subject's identifier number would take you to a (randomly generated) "audit trail" showing the sort of places that use of the card might have been recorded in the last 24 hours. Plus, perhaps, a background file. There would also be links to cross-reference this subject with eg credit card or NHS databases.

Of course we'd need to be *very* careful not to suggest we're talking about real people. No names! Every page would also contain a disclaimer at the bottom and a link to the main NO2ID website.

I don't think we in Edinburgh have the resources to actually realise this, maybe someone else does.

A lot easier than to get census coverage. The census has only bluster to enforce it. (If they prosecute you either for evasion or for lying, it proves the information could be gathered from another source isn't needed.) And there has been no gain for the census office in pressing harder, because to do so would demonstrate how worthless its data are.

If the HO gets its way and a card/number becomes necessary to claim benefits, run a telephone, have a bank account, or rent property, then follow up with house-to-house checks where they draw a blank against the postcode database on the TV licensing model, that will force very high rates of at least nominal compliance.

Census prosecutions failed as people denied they were, in fact, the 'householder', to whom the form had been posted. Both of, say, a married couple, could use this defence when charged (separately) for not returning the form.

Infinite delay was not prosecutable either, as long as 'intent not to complete' was not present.

And there was me awaiting my day in court ...