NO2ID

NO2ID

NO2ID's ID Card & Database State Online Discussion Forum
 
It is currently Thu, 17 Apr 2014 00:50:24 +0000

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: Joining the dots - heavy reading alert!
PostPosted: Mon, 15 Jan 2007 20:14:51 +0000 
Offline
C-List
C-List

Joined: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 23:22:16 +0000
Posts: 880
It occurs to me that many people who haven't been tracking this issue as closely as NO2ID will not be aware of the key documents and initiatives that have led up to, or are a part of, these latest data-sharing 'revelations'.

To provide a single point of reference for now (to be added to main website later - see 'About ID cards' for a more exhaustive historical list) I include below links to what appear to be the most important ones, in roughly chronological order:

1) The Citizen Information Project [Treasury] - an Office for National Statistics (ONS) project, quietly 'wrapped into' the National ID Scheme just after the passing of the Identity Cards Act 2006. All the available documentation on CIP is published here: http://www.gro.gov.uk/cip/

If you want to start somewhere, I strongly recommend the Final Report - you could get lost in the rest, which may have been the point of publishing it all - available as a 405KB PDF:

http://www.gro.gov.uk/cip/Download.asp? ... -26296.pdf

2) 'Transformational Government' [Cabinet Office] - the key strategy document, subtitled 'Enabled by technology' with the the cringe-worthy strapline: 'Citizen and business-centred shared services, professionally delivered'. Places the National Identity Register (or 'NIR' - see below) right at the centre of things. Available as a 412KB PDF file:

http://www.cio.gov.uk/documents/pdf/tra ... rategy.pdf

John Suffolk – the Government's new 'Chief Information Officer' - publishes an Annual Report on 'Transformational Government', the first of which you can comment on here: http://www.commentonthis.com/tfg/

3) The Identity Cards Act 2006 [Home Office] - bullied onto the statute books in March 2006, this is the piece of legislation that prompted the setting up of NO2ID as a public campaign. The 'National Identity Register' - whether one database, as originally promised, or three or many more - sits at the heart of the government's 'identity management' ambitions. And its tentacles will reach into every aspect of YOUR life, if we don't stop it and get the Act repealed.

http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2006/uk ... 015_en.pdf - 217KB PDF
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/en2006/ukpg ... 015_en.pdf - a further 187KB of Explanatory Notes...

4) 'Information Sharing Vision Statement' [DCA] - buried in September 2006, just after the anniversary of 9/11 and when Tony Blair's troubles at the TUC were bound to grab the headlines. As NO2ID said at the time, "The announcement of the abolition of privacy ought to be big news" - it wasn't. We even went so far as to accuse the Information Commissioner of "throwing in the towel". People may draw their own conclusions from the deafening silence from the ICO on these latest announcements...

http://www.dca.gov.uk/foi/sharing/infor ... haring.pdf - 399KB PDF

5) The Varney Review [Treasury] - Full title, 'Service transformation: A better service for citizens and businesses, a better deal for the taxpayer', fronted by Sir David Varney and published in December 2006. Available as a 752KB PDF file:

http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/53D ... review.pdf

You can also read it online and comment on a paragraph-by-paragraph basis at Sam Smith's excellent http://www.commentonthis.com/varney/

6) 'Strategic Action Plan for the National Identity Scheme - Safeguarding your identity' [Home Office] - note the none-too-subtle shift from 'ID cards'. Buried literally hours before Parliament rose for Christmas on 19th December 2006. Available as an 858KB PDF file:

http://www.identitycards.gov.uk/downloa ... n_Plan.pdf

Commentable copy here: http://www.commentonthis.com/idaction/ You may note that the word "trust" does not appear once in the entire document. A pretty fundamental concept for identity in any shape or form, entirely absent from the government's plans...

--

These are the the reports published to date. But there are yet more in the pipeline:

7) 'The Straw Committee' - we hadn't even heard that this was going on, until Stephen Harrison (chief civil servant at UK IPS) let it slip at a meeting of the British Computer Society. Intended to find "quick wins for identity management" so that the government can claim that state ID control is good for us, and that it is actually doing something, anything, about it - despite having failed to put any of the ID scheme out to tender almost a year after forcing through the legislation.

8) 'The Hutton Report' - mysteriously absent, despite having been dragged in to justify the latest data sharing announcements. Another review, this time of 'customer care standards across public services', that forms part of the Prime Minister's 11th hour sweeping policy review, a last-ditch attempt to tie his successor to his view of the New Labour project. Unfortunately, Gordon Brown and others do seem to be buying it...

[Clearly, given the government's outstanding record on IT delivery, the best way to improve the quality and efficiency of public services is to join all their databases together to permit data-sharing on an unprecedented scale and give bureaucrats even more control over every aspect of our lives... NOT.]

9) The 'Public Private Forum on Identity Management' - the former CEO of HBOS, Sir James Crosby, chairs Gordon Brown's 'ID taskforce' that is expected to release a report in March 2007 on "how the public and private sectors can work together... to maximise efficiency and effectiveness".

It seems that there are quite a few of these reports floating about - might it not be more 'efficient and effective' to have a proper debate, rather than to let the various departments, potential successors and candidates for the post-Blair top slots squabble amongst themselves?

Of course not, because we have...

10) 'Citizen panels' / 'Citizen forums' - Tony Blair now tells us that:

"Ordinary people [hand-picked by government-retained PR merchants, of course] will have the chance to directly influence government decisions [i.e. be used in a profoundly undemocratic way to rubber-stamp government policy] as part of a major policy review starting this month.

"Members of the public will be consulted in a "deliberative forum" that will put them in the shoes of decision makers in government [overlooking for a moment the fact that these people won't be elected representatives, why are we supposed to be so impressed by this?]. Cabinet Office Ministers Pat McFadden and Ed Miliband will support them throughout the process ['support'? More like 'manage any troublemakers that slip through the selection process'].

"The February meetings will see 100 delegates study official papers currently under discussion, and then consider the same dilemmas [i.e. "We'll fix the questions, or at least tell you what they are." Surely these 'ordinary people' can make up their own minds what questions to ask? They might even help the government think through the issues from an 'ordinary person's' perspective...] which Ministers face on a daily basis before making their final decisions."

The citizens' panels are expected to start reporting in March - hmm, I wonder if this could be timed to steal any of Crosby's thunder? - having had just one month to deliberate on what, quite clearly, has taken ministers and civil servants years to cook up.

--

There's a lot to plough through, but I urge those of you who want to understand just how concerted and deliberate an attack on civil liberty, personal security and privacy this is to make the time. The government is relying on you not to.

_________________
Phil Booth
national.coordinator@no2id.net


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 16:59:52 +0000 
Offline
D-List
D-List

Joined: Sun, 26 Mar 2006 10:50:39 +0000
Posts: 325
Location: A strange land governed by control freaks
Hi Phil
You've missed one of the earliest ones....

Don't know if it had something to do with a manifesto / Egov....

But it hinted that people would access Gov't service through the interactive TV's, that you could book into hospitals etc. etc.
it mentioned selling the technology to other countries...

It gave an example of how it could help improve serveces:-
Janet and John were going to take their holiday in Devon. You are pregnant would you like us to arrange for a doctor? would you like us to show you the route direction? You haven't paid your Tax disc, would you like to renew that now.....
-- Mind is blank and I cannot remember which document it was, although we did have a discussion about some of the entries on this site

I think this is a really pertinent document as it addresses the Governments
initial ideas to this project, which despite assurances is indeed turning out as they initially envisaged.

i.e I have just renewed the tax disk over the telephone - I did not speak to a human. The computer has checked my car insurance and mot certificates. It has taken my card number (it now has details of my bank).. At one time this was checked by the post office cashier now the databases are interlinked and no-one is operating them???

Hell as silly as this looks the unions representing the countries biggest employer should be worried about this!

_________________
We the people when standing together become a force which cannot be ignored.


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 17:17:25 +0000 
Offline
Moderator

Joined: Tue, 18 Jan 2005 14:56:20 +0000
Posts: 5210
Location: Glasgow
That was in Electronic Government Services for the 21st Century
Quote:
Anthony was asleep. Gail and John sat down in front of their TV and switched into the TPA Travel Portal. Having identified themselves they were greeted by a smiling digital face of a woman.

_________________
Geraint.
3085 D1DD B2A8 15ED 492F E75D 7175 7737 9D10 98D3 - Fingerprint


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 12:35:21 +0000 
Offline
D-List
D-List

Joined: Sun, 26 Mar 2006 10:50:39 +0000
Posts: 325
Location: A strange land governed by control freaks
Bloody hell... It has already happened..

Received a letter today from my doctors claiming they needed to speak to clinical supplier EMIS..

Who are presently hosting 39 million patient records...
Who believe in interoperability between DRs and suppliers (drugs etc) for clinical trials.

But look at this...
Quote:

DigiTV is a public sector service that provides information and interactive services via digital TV and mobile phones. DigiTV allows patients to view, book and cancel doctors appointments using EMIS Access via the interactive services available with Sky TV, Cable, Freeview boxes with modems and WAP-enabled mobile phones.

Currently live in South Yorkshire, the digital TV and mobile version of EMIS Access is available to any PCT or surgery in the UK.
Visit www.digitv.gov.uk (opens in new window)


http://www.emis-online.com/about-us/partners/
How the bloody hell has this happened so quickly...
More to the point how the bloody hell have the media not done or said something about it!!

What is happening with this bloody country??

_________________
We the people when standing together become a force which cannot be ignored.


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 14:24:09 +0000 
Offline
C-List
C-List

Joined: Wed, 29 Dec 2004 23:22:16 +0000
Posts: 880
Yes indeed, the 'joined up' 'e-Government' agenda has a long history - my list was intended to highlight documents and initiatives that relate explicitly to the ID scheme and data-sharing proposals that go with it.

There is extensive material on the whole e-Government programme going back many years. For a frank and open discussion of this, and issues around it, one could do far worse than checking out William Heath's excellent IdealGovernment website.

_________________
Phil Booth
national.coordinator@no2id.net


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Audit COmmission Data Matching
PostPosted: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 13:25:43 +0000 
Offline

Joined: Sun, 25 Oct 2009 13:01:16 +0000
Posts: 10
One area crying out for action is the use by the Audit Commission of data sharing in order to categorise large numbers of council tax payers as 'high risk' fraud cases.

This 'scam' is aimed at people from whose council tax bill a discount of 25% has been deducted. In England, this discount comes under Section 11 Local Government Act. This provides for discounts of 25% and 50%. It is important to realise that this discount is not based upon simple head counts, and that the common nickname 'single person discount' is very misleading. It is also important to realise that it is quite possible for a person to be lawfully receiving this discount even if six people are on the electoral register but not on council tax data sets.

What the Audit Commission does is to match the two data sets I have mentioned. It appears that it sends 'hit lists' to councils comprising every individual address at which more than one person is on the electoral register. It then insists that councils investigate these lists. The software is such that councils can report the outcomes of these investigations directly to the Audit Commission. Councils that do not 'investigate' run the risk of their local auditor issuing a public interest report stating that they are not doing their job properly.

It would appear that once the 'liable adult' has been 'flagged' on the software as a 'potential' or 'high risk' fraud, those with access to Audit Commission software are regarded as having valid access to the personal data not just of the liable adult but of the people on the electoral register. My understanding is that this 'soft data' ie the 'high fraud risk' categorisation may be shared with a wide range of public and private bodies.

It appears to be lawful to keep secret from each person so labelled the fact that they have been so labelled. However, since the Government introduced a statutory code of data matching which aims to achieve transparency, and sets limits on the sort of data matching that the Audit Commission in England (and Scotland has a slightly different code) people are alerted to roughly what is going on through compulsory fair processing notices. In that sense, the cat is out of the bag, and the unfair and arbitrary way in which totally innocent entitled people are being labelled and categorised is clear.

Unfortunately, fair processing notices give rise to false beliefs that Audit Commission data matching leads to the compilation of lists of people where there is 'prima facie' evidence that there is no lack of entitlement. A linked but equally false belief is that the Audit Commission's data matching has identified information 'inconsistent' with some 'claim' that the taxpayer has made or is making.

Confusion is compounded by the false beliefs held by at least some Audit Commission staff, including, sadly, regional advisors, and by many local government Audit staff, to whom the NFI hit lists are often sent, that this tax discount is like benefits, ie based upon 'claims'. Even when sent letters from the Audit Commission correcting these false beliefs, local authority staff appear to persist in them.

They seem to argue backwards from the Code of Practice. If the Code of Practice says that Audit Commission data matching produces lists of 'potentially fraudulent' cases, and cases where there is an inconsistency, then, it is felt, there simply must be something wrong or the Audit Commission would not have put the person on the list in the first place.

However, if pressed for clarification, the Audit Commission admits that its logic is completely different. It accepts that this is not a list of people who are not, on the face of the evidence, unentitled to the discount. It accepst that it has not found any information 'inconsistent' with the lawful duties of the taxpayer. But it says that if councils investigate all the cases they will eventually discover some people who are not entitled to the discount.

The Audit Commission also argues that it does not misunderstand Section 11 discounts, but has as yet not been able to explain why in that case it submitted a number of arguments to Parliament, prior to obtaining statutory access to the electoral register that it could in fact tell by using the electoral register that people were not entitled to their discount.

I think NoToId members should all write to their MPS and to their councils and to the electoral commisson and so on suggesting that this match does not conform to the statutory code of conduct and asking such other questions as appear to them to be appropriate.

_________________
Opposed to evidence-free suspicion


Report this post
Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Joining the dots - heavy reading alert!
PostPosted: Fri, 26 Mar 2010 09:07:58 +0000 
A petition on Audit Commission data mangling is on line here

http://petitions.number10.gov.uk/NFIhitlists/

One possible horror story is on line on Bolton Borough council web site.

This is in respect of the Audit Commission 'rising 18s' data match. This finds 17 year olds listed on the electoral register but who are not on council tax data sets to address in advance the risk that the parent of an 18 year old who does not fall to be disregarded conceals their existence from council tax data sets.

According to the statutory code of data matching practice, councils must investigate this 'match' (so much for the legal definitions of matching as 'inconsistencies' using normal practices for investigation OF FRAUD AND ERROR.

Bolton Council staff have decided that 21 cases were 'frauds' even though they have been told by council tax staff that the young people in question probably fall to be disregarded and the discounts have been removed even though council tax staff say they will probably have to be put back.

It is frightening to realise that fraud is a mens rea offence and can in theory be committed even when there is entitlement. You have to do something ordinary people would regard as dishonest and know that what you did was dishonest.

Remember there is NO duty to tell the council about somebody''s 18th birthday unless they do affect the discount. Disregarded newly 18 year old people do not.

But these families have somehow been decided by the council to be thieves even though they are thought to be entitled to the discount and therefore had not legal duty to report a change in circumstances to the council.

If you know anybody who had an odd letter from the council this spring, get them to complain to the information commissioner, the audit commission and the council.


Report this post
Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Joining the dots - heavy reading alert!
PostPosted: Wed, 23 May 2012 16:40:55 +0000 
Credit Agencies are now performing a lot of this work, or at least muscling in on as much action as they can bill for.
You ain't gonna find that information on your credit report though. Are you, Mr Credit Expert.com ?


Report this post
Top
  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re: Joining the dots - heavy reading alert!
PostPosted: Mon, 18 Jun 2012 16:30:39 +0000 
Follow the link - 'our partners'. All big data mining operations, all linked to Credit Agency data.

HMRC - Income Tax Evasion
Council Tax Fraud
Housing Benefit Fraud
Electoral Roll Fraud
SubLetting Fraud
Money Laundering Identity checks
etc
etc

http://www.callcredit.co.uk/markets-ser ... r/partners


Report this post
Top
  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 9 posts ] 

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You can post new topics in this forum
You can reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
Template made by DEVPPL/ThatBigForum