The reason why people don't feel concerned

lenoiranne · **Joined:** Wed, 13 Apr 2005 10:24:59 +0000 **Posts:** 90

You all seem surprised about the lack of concern and opposition the ID cards & database generate among the genaral public.

For one thing, you seem to forget that the personal data which will be collected and stored on the ID cards & data base are the same data public and private bodies already possess. if the government already possess all such data on each individual, most people don't know what all the fuss is about

For another, pressure groups fail to recognise that most people fear ID fraud, mistaken identity, terrorism ect... for them the government is at least trying to answer their fears.

Finally, neither the government nor pressure groups address the problem of malpractice an dabuse Data collection has caused( discrimination, undue control, manipulation) Instead of warning people of the risks ID cards & database could have on their Civil Liberties, they should warn them of damage Data collection has already done on them.

Unless pressure goups address the three main problems on the issue( National security, crime, abuse), people will always support whatever schemes that are trying to address them, even if it is only partially an ineffectively

Longrider · **Joined:** Fri, 11 Feb 2005 16:25:32 +0000 **Posts:** 302

I'm not in the least bit surprised. The vast majority of the population are apathetic when it comes to politics. That they have not bothered to find out or even remotely consider the implications of this bill is no surprise whatsoever - indeed, I'd be surprised if they did.

wtwu · **Joined:** Thu, 30 Dec 2004 09:42:28 +0000 **Posts:** 721

lenoiranne wrote:

For one thing, you seem to forget that the personal data which will be collected and stored on the ID cards & data base are the same data public and private bodies already possess. if the government already possess all such data on each individual, most people don't know what all the fuss is about

If that were true, then why waste billions of pounds on Yet Another Centralised Database ? Why hasn't the dream of "joined up e-government" already happened ? Why do you ever need to fill in the same details like name and natioanal insurance number (details which "they know" already) in , say, your tax forms, year after year after year ?

The only difference the NIR will make to , say, your tax form , is that there will be an additional field for you to fill in , your National Identity Register Number, as well, not instead of, all the existing tax references , NINo etc. The ID Card scheme will not magically solve all the existing "joined-up e-government" problems, it will simply add to them.

"They know all this information about me anyway" argument is as as wrong as "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear"

.

lenoiranne · **Joined:** Wed, 13 Apr 2005 10:24:59 +0000 **Posts:** 90

Actually I am surprised and I think that the vast majority of the population are actually disillusioned and not apathetic when it comes to politics. Who can blame them?

As for why the government need Another Centralised Database it only to make things easier for them, to spy on us.

wtwu are you really telling me that public and private bodies don't hold any data on us that they share with the government when asked to?

I think people have got a point, if we want to protect our civil liberties we must get rid of any schemes that violate our privacy and not only ID cards and database.

Geraint · **Posted:** Fri, 10 Jun 2005 12:43:59 +0000

lenoiranne wrote:

wtwu are you really telling me that public and private bodies don't hold any data on us that they share with the government when asked to?

Of course there are plenty of private organisations that will happily share information with the government and there is no doubt that certain people (e.g. the security services) can get hold of any information about us that is held by various government departments.

However, collating that information takes some effort so it is not really feasible to systematically abuse the availability of that information against most of the population. As soon as it becomes easier to pull all that information together, abuse of the system becomes easier.

Government inefficiency is one of the best protectors of civil liberties. We make government ultra-efficient at our peril.

jymjim · **Posted:** Fri, 10 Jun 2005 12:53:39 +0000

{quote]
"They know all this information about me anyway" argument is as as wrong as "If you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear"
[/quote]

I think you are right wtwu, and it is a line i have heard many times while out talking to people and giving out leaflets in Sheffield.

Now, i think i have made quite a bit of progress on working out decent replies to "if you have nothing to hide" yada yada, but i am yet to find a set of answers that i am happy with to respond to "they know everything about us already.".

Usually i just say something about the fact that, if so much information is already known, why should we create yet another database to hold it all over again, and also, if it is all known, why do "they" need so much more (plus a record of everytime you are checked on the NIR)?

I'd really appreciate some good points to make on this one, as i am sue others would, not least because i'm having a stall tomorrow at "Peace in the Park" in Sheffield :-)

thanks

james

Acelin · **Posted:** Fri, 10 Jun 2005 15:31:24 +0000

I have spoken to a lot of people about these ID plans and the main thing that struck me was how many people either didnt know anything about them at all, or had completely the wrong idea (mainly through the governments disinformation) believing them (the ID plans) to be far less malignant and threatening than they are. But when informed of only a few of the ID schemes more odious details, they all immediately became united in opposition to it (the ID scheme).
I think this tells us quite a lot.....

Guest · **Posted:** Fri, 10 Jun 2005 15:51:13 +0000

The argument that because they already have a lot of information on us anyway so this scheme won't make much difference is completely flawed. Its like saying we already pay too much tax so we shouldn't mind paying a bit more. Surely the best counter argument is that the data is currently decentralised, but putting it all into one database makes it easier for anyone to get all the information at once, whether to steal our identity or harrass us for being politically incorrect. Explain that there is already too much data on us so having more all in one place will make our identities even more vulnerable and saleable. The old eggs in one basket argument.

Carol Ann · **Posted:** Fri, 10 Jun 2005 23:18:19 +0000

There is a big difference proposed here. People have to realise that this is not just another proposal for more data to be collected, it is a horrible, sinister, compulsory (it strikes a chord in a lot of people when you use the word "compulsory" as an inherent trait, of some of us at least, is that people don't like to be ordered around and told what to do like they are school children or slaves) "register" of something that YOU innately own - your identity. Your identity does not belong to a control-freak government bureaucrat, it belongs only to you and God.

Biometrics is the word that might get a reaction here. How many people actually realise that they will be surrendering their fingerprints (yeah, just like they have been arrested and are being pushed around at a police station) and their iris scan and "any other biometric that we deem to be appropriate".

It may be true that government agencies and companies already have a lot of information on the individual now, BUT NOBODY HAS "CAPTURED" YOUR BIOMETIC INFORMATION!!!!!!!

Do people realise that by arguing in favour of id cards they are saying "yes" to being herded like cattle, numbered like the same, fingerprinted and have their iris turned into a series of pixles? Do they also realise that they are being made to PAY BIG BUCKS (the last estimate I heard was 95 pounds) for the privilege of being treated like farm animals?

lenoiranne · **Joined:** Wed, 13 Apr 2005 10:24:59 +0000 **Posts:** 90

Thanks to new technology it doesn't take that much effort to collate information legally or illegally. But sure, it will take even less time with ID cards & centralised database.

Actually, some of our biometric data are already in the hands of our doctor, so the government could access them quite easily.

The arguement that the government have all the information on us is not completely wrong, and that why pressure groups don't know what to answer to that.
I am not saying that people want ID cards to be introduced at all, on the contrary, but they know that they civil liberties and privacy are already violated by the amount of data public and private bodies hold on them. Pressure groups should answer the problem first.
What is more, the data hold by such bodies have lead to crime,malpractice and abuse by data users ( ID theft, discrimination, undue control, manipulation ect...) This is all happening now without ID cards & database. Sure, ID cards will make things worse.

stu2630 · **Posted:** Sat, 11 Jun 2005 19:44:30 +0000

Be careful not to over-estimate the access that the government has to private information. I have spent many years working for the government in a sensitive role and I know very well that, at present, there are quite a few serious obstacles to overcome to find stuff out about people even though you have a legitimate reason for needing to know. A lot of information, for example, you can't get hold of without an Order from a High Court Judge (and these judges have to be 100% satisfied that the information is urgently needed for a very serious reason - and then you have to report back about what information you have been given and how you used it). At least there are some safeguards in place right now.

One of the main reasons that HMG want the NIR is precisely because it can't readily get its hands on such confidential information.

Guest · **Posted:** Sat, 11 Jun 2005 20:31:29 +0000

lenoiranne wrote:

For one thing, you seem to forget that the personal data which will be collected and stored on the ID cards & data base are the same data public and private bodies already possess.

Excuse me, but it is you who seems to be oblivious to the facts in this case.

I have never been stopped, let alone arrested by the Police, so the government doesn't have my fingerprints, retinal scans or multi-angle facial photographs on file anywhere and they have no moral right to force me to provide that data to them just so that I can continue to enjoy the privilege of being a living and law-abiding British citizen (sarcasm).

wtwu · **Joined:** Thu, 30 Dec 2004 09:42:28 +0000 **Posts:** 721

Anonymous wrote:

retinal scans

Retinal Scans are not the same as Iris Scans, they are much more uncomfortable to experience (akin to a medical eye examination). Iris Scans are just another video capture photograph, which can take some time to align before the sysem works ok (N.B. potential delays in adjusting the height of the camera for different people).

Retinal Scans do not feature in the Government's plans for a national ID Card / Database

Guest · **Posted:** Sun, 12 Jun 2005 18:27:45 +0000

wtwu wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Retinal Scans are not the same as Iris Scans,

Thanks for your correction on that detail.

All I was trying to point out to lenoiranne is that the government doesn't have fingerprint data, iris scans or multi-angle/3D scan facial photographs of law-abiding British citizens at the moment, but they want them for these ID cards, so her statement was incorrect. However, she doesn't seem to want to acknowledge that.

lenoiranne · **Joined:** Wed, 13 Apr 2005 10:24:59 +0000 **Posts:** 90

As I keep saying, ID cards & database will make things easier to access our data, and I am as against it as you all are. I don't think that I over-estimate government's powers I just don't believe that access is always done lawfully by following the rules.

Strangely, you all seem only concerned with Biometric data, What about all the other data?. Fingerprints, iris scans or multi-angle facial photographs or only three out of a long list of personal data the government have been collecting for decades now. Anyway, CCTVs and mobile phones (video camera) might have already registrered most of our facial data.

I am against biometric data but I am also against all the other data governments keep collecting on each individual.

Gesh · **Posted:** Mon, 13 Jun 2005 16:48:33 +0000

lenoiranne wrote:

, you all seem only concerned with Biometric data, [...].

On the contrary, I'm only concerned about biometrics because they are promoted by the Government as an USP for the "ID card" system. The thing to worry about is the unique register numbers and the cros referencing that goes with them. Unindexed, loose data aren't much danger. The messy partial systems created by the reference agencies and aggregators in the marketplace can be a nuisance, but they can't without government help prevent you living. It is when free data is not permitted, and everything in life must be bound to a personal dossier reference that we have a problem.

Guest · **Posted:** Mon, 13 Jun 2005 20:53:39 +0000

lenoiranne wrote:

Quote:

Strangely, you all seem only concerned with Biometric data,

The government has already told the Police that they will give them access to the entire population's fingerprints so that they can compare them to fingerprints taken from unsolved crimes. That may sound reasonable to some people, but when you consider that many innocent people have been sent to prison entirely on the basis of dodgy fingerprint evidence, then it gets a bit worrying. The fingerprint data will also be handed over to Europol, the NSA and assorted foreign governments and the data could be incorrectly matched to prints from crime scenes etc, with the result that innocent British citizens end up in prison. See:

Errors put wrong men in jail, says fingerprint specialist - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;sessionid=EJY2KCKRTCODLQFIQMGSM5WAVCBQWJVC?xml=/news/2001/08/26/nfing26.xml&secureRefresh=true&_requestid=16913
<a href="http://media.guardian.co.uk/mediaguardian/story/0,,518667,00.html">Falsely fingered</a>
<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/panorama/1416777.stm">Finger of Suspicion</a>
<a href="http://innocent.org.uk/misc/fingerprints_times.html"> Fingerprints system that needs a helping hand</a>
<a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/05/26/fbi_madrid_blunder/print.html">FBI apology for Madrid bomb fingerprint fiasco</a>
<a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/04/06/identity/">Are fingerprints really infallible, unique ID?</a>

(If you aren't registered for all of the newspapers' websites then you can get their login details from: http://www.bugmenot.com

I suspect that once the National Identity Register (NIR) is set up the Police will eventually be given complete access to it for whatever purpose they wish. See: <a href="http://www.computerweekly.com/articles/article.asp?liArticleID=136743&liFlavourID=1">CCTV could be matched to ID data.</a> I recently found out that we in Britain have one surveillance camera in a public place for every 8 people and the number is increasing, (that is one of the highest numbers of CCTV cameras per head of population of any country). I can think of many ways in which being able to automatically identify someone from remote surveillance camera footage and record their presence at a certain time or place could be abused by an unscrupulous official. Also it would certainly facilitate Police State activities, for example, identifying and logging people who go on a demonstration against a government policy, and all of this could be done using software without any human input. George Orwell must be spinning in his grave...

lenoiranne wrote:

Fingerprints, iris scans or multi-angle facial photographs or only three out of a long list of personal data the government have been collecting for decades now..

But they don't have these data for most people and this data is likely to be the most damaging to a person's ability to remain free in the long term.

lenoiranne wrote:

Anyway, CCTVs and mobile phones (video camera) might have already registrered most of our facial data.

I don't even own a mobile phone and how are CCTV cameras going to collect 3D facial scan data for anonymous persons, even if they were capable of collecting that data, which they aren't.

lenoiranne · **Joined:** Wed, 13 Apr 2005 10:24:59 +0000 **Posts:** 90

We all have got an unique register Social security number, so people can easily be tracked down. And anyway, Biometric data would not be the only data the ID cards & databses will store. So all data are going to be indexed.

The so-called messy partial systems can actually be much more than a nuisance and can prevent freedom and autonomy , when it leads to discrimination and undue control, or when data are stolen (ID theft) to commit crimes and innocents are sent to prison because of it. That is the thing to worry about.

Within the European Community and everywhere else in the world for that matter, millions of data users have access to our personal data, for social and business purposes or even for national security. Complete strangers have a right of access to the private details of our lives only because governments have said so. Something is wrong here ! Most of these data could easily be substituted to avoid abuse, fraud and malpractice

But I agree with you 'Biometric' ID card is a dangerous scheme.

Walkingman00 · **Posted:** Thu, 16 Jun 2005 16:51:40 +0000

I love it when people come away with statements like, "We've already got social security numbers so we're easy to track down." (Please forgive my paraphrasing.) And just how would one go about tracking down a person with only their social security number? And how would one do it "easily"?

Listen folks, as one who is indifferent about the whole UK identity-card thing I'll be happy to explain my indifference. When I think about the possibility of a UK government successfully completing a multi-billion pound computer project I just laugh. Having Stalin propose an identity-card scheme is one thing. Having Laurel & Hardy propose it is something entirely different.

Guest · **Posted:** Thu, 16 Jun 2005 19:58:34 +0000

Walkingman00 wrote:

I love it when people come away with statements like, "We've already got social security numbers so we're easy to track down." (Please forgive my paraphrasing.) And just how would one go about tracking down a person with only their social security number? And how would one do it "easily"?

Listen folks, as one who is indifferent about the whole UK identity-card thing I'll be happy to explain my indifference. When I think about the possibility of a UK government successfully completing a multi-billion pound computer project I just laugh. Having Stalin propose an identity-card scheme is one thing. Having Laurel & Hardy propose it is something entirely different.

Actually one can be already tracked down very easily via their health service number through the department of health and secuity!.. this can be also achieved by just providing name and date of birth....
so next question is, if this is achievable now then why do they need id cards when this is possible through the health service......

Guest · **Posted:** Thu, 16 Jun 2005 21:31:11 +0000

We already register our places of residence, our cars and our guns, what's 1 more?

Guest · **Posted:** Thu, 16 Jun 2005 23:08:14 +0000

Guest wrote:

We already register our places of residence, our cars and our guns, what's 1 more?

What's one more, :roll:

well it is eveything! the next step will be when they find out this is not going to work is chipping you........

stinkyid · **Joined:** Fri, 17 Jun 2005 22:06:11 +0000 **Posts:** 6

Quote:

I don't even own a mobile phone and how are CCTV cameras going to collect 3D facial scan data for anonymous persons, even if they were capable of collecting that data, which they aren't.

you have a great deal to learn :!:

stinkyid

lenoiranne · **Joined:** Wed, 13 Apr 2005 10:24:59 +0000 **Posts:** 90

I love it when people come away with statements like, "And just how would one go about tracking down a person with only their social security number?" (Please forgive my paraphrasing.)

As most of us have already explained we can be tracked down with almost anything credit cards, mobile phone, date of birth, passport number ect... But do feel free to live in 'LA LA' land if you want to.

mumraa · **Joined:** Tue, 19 Apr 2005 16:04:48 +0000 **Posts:** 15

Walkingman00 wrote:

When I think about the possibility of a UK government successfully completing a multi-billion pound computer project I just laugh. Having Stalin propose an identity-card scheme is one thing. Having Laurel & Hardy propose it is something entirely different.

Lets hope Laurel & Hardy remain in power then.

NO2ID

The reason why people don't feel concerned

Who is online