NO2ID

The British Air Line Pilots Association (BALPA) has had a motion carried by this year's Trades Union Congress:

http://www.tuc.org.uk/congress/tuc-15321-f0.cfm



http://www.tuc.org.uk/congress/tuc-15221-f4.cfm



Will this have any effect on the Labour government at all, or will they carry on regardless ?

Half-steam ahead and rearrange the deck-chairs, most likely.

Generalising on the basis of a modest knowledge of UK pilots and an even more modest knowledge of BALPA:

1. BALPA and its members wouldn't get into this fight if they didn't feel they had to.

2. They wouldn't get into it if they didn't believe they could win.

3. If they back down, it will be because they have been bought off. It's hard to see what the government could do to buy them off.

4. If they don't back down, the government will have to back down. Another defeat in IPS's unbroken record of defeats. (Good job IPS don't run an airline.)

5. When IPS were trounced by the banks and the major retailers, there was no crowing. There was no benefit to the banks and the retailers to be gained by crowing. The situation could be different with BALPA. They have an interest in making it clear to their members, loudly and in public, that BALPA will always strongly defend them.

6. The TUC has the same interest in making it clear to its members and everyone else that they are powerful. Demonstrating their power in the cause of everyone's civil liberties, not just their members', could be universally attractive. Which would make IPS look universally unattractive. Which they are ...

7. ... because my God, if ever there was a natural constituency for ID cards, it's airline pilots, and if IPS can't convince airline pilots that ID cards are a good idea, they can't convince anyone.

8. IPS's defeat by BALPA will strengthen the hand of the NUJ and UCU, who have also had a motion carried, and strengthen the hand of the NUS, whose members are next on the ID card roster after non-EEA nationals and airside workers ...

9. ... which leaves IPS with 50,000 non-EEA nationals maybe, or maybe not, no airside workers, no students, a lot of deckchairs to rearrange and all the time in the world to do it.

10. In the unlikely event that PA Consulting lose their NIS contract, IPS would have to draft their framework for the outlines of a strategy for rearrangement (deckchairs) without their regular consultants. The horror. The horror.

Yes the TUC motions strengthens the hand of anyone trying to get support from local branches of trade unions. It also sets up ID cards as a divinding issue on the current fault line within the labour party. Enougth pressure and eventually it will crack.

As the UCU delegate to the TUC Congress that spoke in favour of Motion 45 I figure you may be interested in my speech.

Although this speech was well received by Congress please note that as I wasted some time at the begining replying to the rather strange contribution from the GMB delegate I was unable to present the final few paragraphs.

Cheers

Mark Campbell
UCU National Executive

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Full prepared speech to TUC Congress 2008*

President, Congress,

Mark Campbell – University and College Union.

I am really pleased to be able to offer my union’s full support for Motion 45.

At our own congress this May we unanimously agreed to urge our members to not only oppose, but more importantly to defy, government plans to introduce identity cards. We also affiliated to the NO2ID Campaign and I urge all colleagues to do likewise.

As you may know, along with aviation workers, the government plans to pilot the ID Scheme with non-EU students. We believe this could well deter them from choosing to study in the UK particularly at a time when we are facing greater international competition.

However, what delegates may not know is that UK-based students themselves are also going to be coerced into getting ID Cards in 2010. They will need them in order to apply for student loans.

We believe that this nails the lie that this is somehow a ‘voluntary scheme’. The government keep saying ‘it will of course be optional there will be choice’. This is the sort of ‘choice’ we are increasingly seeing from this government! Like the elderly being able to choose between food and fuel – some choice! Working class students will be able to ‘choose’ to get an ID card in order to apply for the necessary funds to be able to study, or they will be able to ‘choose’ not to go to university – some choice!

We believe that these ID card proposals are part of a centralisation of surveillance information – the central database (linked to networks of license plate details, facial recognition systems, criminal records, DNA profiles, etc, etc,…) can store communications and enable the searching through of patterns of travel, employment records, health histories, and retail transactions.

The government has failed to take appropriate advice from those academics in the field best placed to offer it. For example, the London School of Economics detailed research and costings have simply been dismissed out of hand by government officials.

The ID System is in and of itself an assault on our civil liberties and places a potentially dangerous amount of power in the hands of government. You will be monitored on where you go, what you buy, how ill you have been, your entire employment history, etc, etc…

And, just who is going to have access to all of this personal information? According to the government this data will be completely protected and secure…. Wait a minute – aren’t these the same people who have already overseen the ‘accidental’ loss of countless millions of sensitive records!

Let’s be crystal clear. These cards and the identity database behind them are part of the scapegoating and deliberately devise agenda of both the government and certain employers behind them. As such, and as stated in the final part of the motion, we need to resist this scheme with all means at our disposal.

Aviation workers are in the front line of this onslaught on our civil liberties and they therefore deserve the complete and effective support of the entire trade union movement.

At an estimated cost of £19.2B the ID Scheme represents a colossal waste of our money. We should be spending this money on our public services not using it to mount the most serious assault on our civil liberties and individual freedoms since the 19th century.

This ID Scheme belongs in the dustbin of history – and let us be clear – this toxic rubbish can’t be recycled!

Support the motion!


* Please note that due to time restrictions I was unable to formally present the final few paragraphs.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Well done, Mark - and thank you!

Yes well spoken Mark, personally it's been heartning to see the support from UCU at a local branch level and good to know the leadership is in touch with the views of it's members. I just hope that with the introduction of ID cards to foreign students, the support staff Unions, and NUS can work togther with UCU on universty campuses across the country to help resist the scheme.

thank you Mark for the speech as well as the advice that from 2010 students will need to be on the NIR as a condition of the student loan process.
Could you point me to where that policy is published?

Hi Lynda,

The situation with UK students has been left deliberately opaque by the Government. In Feb this year there were leaked reports that students would be "blackmailed" into holding identity cards in order to apply for student loans. See: http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/200 ... n.students

Then in March the Home Office placed the following on its website: 'From 2010, young people will be able to volunteer to have ID cards to help them prove their identity as they open their first bank account, take out a student loan or start employment'. Note the word 'volunteer'. To put it bluntly - we don't believe it will actually be voluntry as such in that we think the processing of the student loan application will likely end-up requiring ID Card details...

However, on a positive note, it looks like potential (and existing) students are already giving the Govt a very hard time over this situation. See: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_a ... 513723.ece

Cheers

Mark...

Dear All,

As a pilot member of the British Airline Pilots Association I would like to add the following comments regarding the imposition of ID cards upon British Airline Pilots.

Pilots are to be used as pawns, against their will, in this wasteful and intrusive exercise. The Home Office could not have chosen a less appropriate group for their experiment. Pilots already carry three internationally recognised forms of ID, their passport, Airline Transport Pilots License and Air-side ID card. Furthermore the newly proposed ID card is almost certainly not going to replace any of these other three documents and will most probably have no International validity outside the EU. So what possible additional security purpose could a fourth form of ID card serve, other than as a back door introduction of ID cards for the rest of the British population?

How can BALPA make a stand against the Home Office forcing their members to submit to this additional ID scheme? If BALPA is serious in their rejection of the NID then they should announce their position firmly and vociferously to the British media. If they fail to do so, they will allow those they seek to represent, sleep walk into passive acceptance of the ID cards.

Further comments have been selected and posted below, from PPRUNE, the professional pilots website, where other British airline pilots have voiced their concerns over the ID scheme:

A question for all those 'Pro ID card'. Are you Pro ID card as in a card that proves your identity or are you Pro ID card and database?
Those that approve the database part no doubt would not have minded living in East Germany and having everything about them recorded.
The Government has already added extra bodies entitled to access to Contactpoint (Your children's database) without any consultation.
I usually find that those Pro ID card people have little concept of the database and the Governments dismal record on changing the use of any law or system without consultation or agreement.
I don't worry about them as it is clear that they are in a minority.
Even if I were Pro ID, I would be against the blatant discrimination of Aviation workers.
Having met with the Home Office on the issue of ID cards I am now even more against the introduction in general and especially of the issue to aviation workers.
As it will be specifically against the law for anyone to demand to see your ID card (In the beginning) It would seem a totally pointless exercise.
We know that the system will be trialled at one UK airport initially before being rolled out to all. The Home Office say that the decision has not yet been made as to which airport. They say it would have to be one that is willing to cooperate. However, logical deduction points to Manchester, based on the fact that some new airside passes are now only being issued with a renewal date of 12 months instead of the normal 5 years. Also the fact that they are the first to introduce the full biometric system.
As for cost. £30 will be the initial cost (Rising significantly in later years) and it will be up to each individual/group/Union to negotiate with employers as the individual will be responsible for the cost. I don't think the employers are going to be happy spending hundreds of thousands on a scheme that offers absolutely no benefits especially as it will not even replace the existing security checks.


I don't think I have any misconceptions over the ID card system. I don't think I had any before discussions with the Home Office or After.
From my last post.....
Quote:
As it will be specifically against the law for anyone to demand to see your ID card (In the beginning) It would seem a totally pointless exercise.
I have not stated that it matters a jot which airport is used to begin with. The trial will not be just an issuing exercise. Everything you posted has already been discussed and it is widely known that you will not have to carry it and that it does not replace any other documents/passes.
Unlike some I am actually doing something constructive and not just sitting around in angst. I will do my best to keep this forum informed of anything relevant.
The next major step will be whether the TUC vote for the BALPA motion at Congress.
My opinion is that if they back it then that will put a major obstruction in the way of the act. However, since all the TU National officers met with Jaqui Smith last Thursday, at short notice, I am not counting any chickens.

Because the UK ID card will be a massive database used and cross-referenced by many, many other agencies. Because the UK has a proven track record of leaving said data on trains or roundabouts. Because this data is controlled/used by self-important jobsworths whose arrogance is matched only by their inefficiency/stupidity. Because mistakes in similar (smaller) databases have already proved impossible to correct in a timely fashion. Because any UK national under the age of 40 is genetically unable to spell properly or consistently, so this will find its way onto the database as corruptions. Because any criminal who hacks into the system then automatically has access to every corner of your life. Because these same jobsworths have just made overfilling your bin (which is only emptied once a fortnight) a criminal offence, which will eventually have a negative impact on your ID and therefore your ability to fly an aircraft. These are just the points that spring immediately to my mind.
We already have photo driving licences which fulfill 90% of the security requirement, and could be made to 99.9% - but that wouldn't create enough jobs for said jobsworths.
Apart from the above, I have few objections to IDs ...

Having corresponded with my MP (Labour, back bench) on the matter, he is quite open about the fact that many MPs have serious concerns themselves about how this is being rolled out, the relevance of the whole project, and also I believe the principle of so much data being held in such an unsecure fashion. That is before you even get into the arguments about what the Govt wants all this information for and what use it will be in enhancing national security.
My replies from the Home Office highlight the improved security we will benefit from as a result of the introduction of National ID Cards for airside workers. They do not explain how this will come about though. This despite the fact that foreign nationals will not be required to hold them, and the incumbant Government of this country allows a system whereby foreign nationals falling into the "too difficult to check properly" category are rubber stamped through anyway. Presumably a party so concerned with spin and being seen to do the right thing would not wish to be accused of discrimination.
We as an industry are an easy target. The Govt gets to pick on a sector where you will have no choice but to comply if you wish to continue down your current career path, and at the same time gets to crow about all the proactive steps it is taking to make us all safer. Dumbing down of society that has taken place makes sense when you wish to sell the public smoke and mirrors lies. Please don't forget that our current Home Secretary was more than happy to shaft the guardians of public safety over back-dated pay deals without batting an eye-lid.
Surprisingly, if we could have a relevant, secure and beneficial scheme for National ID, I would happily support it. Sadly, we have a white elephant (to join the herd of others we have had to suffer and pay for over the last 15 and no doubt as many again) instead. And it is being driven by a bunch of people I wouldn't trust to sit the right way round on the lavatory.
Sorry to those of you having to wade through this very personal rant, but this matter has been seriously pg me off for several months now.

It wasn't just Hitler who enforced ID cards. In the 1930s, Holland carried ID cards and they had nothing to fear because they trusted their government. And they were right...nearly. Unfortunately, their ID cards were related to information which also included their religion. So, when the Nazis came marching through in 1940 they could easily identify all the Jews...who were smartly marched off to concentration and death camps.

But hey, I'm being paranoid. That could never happen now....

What I want to know is why will I be stopped from doing my job for refusing to carry an item that's not related to my job that the rest of the population don't have to carry?

Still it's easy. Call an election Gordon

Chips

The notion of having nothing to hide therefore you should not fear being monitored by the state is nothing short of communism.

Who knows what ideas those that rule our lives have in store for us. And with the evidence of the last ten years that labour has so far displayed, it will be full of using laws to suit themselves (think back to when they used their new anti terrorist laws to arrest a 70 yr old labour activist from speaking at a conference).

When these ID cards can be used to determine what you get and when, then how long before those political imbeciles use them for compliance to their way of thinking?

For those of you that have viewed these posts from outside the Uk, and many of you already carry ID cards you may wonder at our reluctance. You have not lived with a government hell bent on protecting itself rather than doing its job of running this country. They want to control us like a huge train set and use us a live experiment that they once talked about as students when as now they have no knowledge of the real world, just an idea of some political ideal.

They are incompetent and they have proven themselves to be so on many occasions, so why would any rational person allow their free lives to be handed over to these creatures?

It is not who I am that worries me it is what they will do with me.

6

Discussed on NO2ID:

NO2ID :: View topic - BALPA TUC motion passed against National Identity Scheme

Quote:

>>Generalising on the basis of a modest knowledge of UK pilots and an even more modest knowledge of BALPA:
1. BALPA and its members wouldn't get into this fight if they didn't feel they had to.

2. They wouldn't get into it if they didn't believe they could win.

3. If they back down, it will be because they have been bought off. It's hard to see what the government could do to buy them off.

4. If they don't back down, the government will have to back down. Another defeat in IPS's unbroken record of defeats. (Good job IPS don't run an airline.)

5. When IPS were trounced by the banks and the major retailers, there was no crowing. There was no benefit to the banks and the retailers to be gained by crowing. The situation could be different with BALPA. They have an interest in making it clear to their members, loudly and in public, that BALPA will always strongly defend them.

6. The TUC has the same interest in making it clear to its members and everyone else that they are powerful. Demonstrating their power in the cause of everyone's civil liberties, not just their members', could be universally attractive. Which would make IPS look universally unattractive. Which they are ...

7. ... because my God, if ever there was a natural constituency for ID cards, it's airline pilots, and if IPS can't convince airline pilots that ID cards are a good idea, they can't convince anyone.

8. IPS's defeat by BALPA will strengthen the hand of the NUJ and UCU, who have also had a motion carried, and strengthen the hand of the NUS, whose members are next on the ID card roster after non-EEA nationals and airside workers ...<<

++ TUC PLEDGES TO RESIST THE NATIONAL IDENTITY SCHEME "WITH ALL
MEANS AT ITS DISPOSAL" ++

This week the Trades Union Congress (TUC) voted at their Congress in
Brighton to resist the National ID scheme with all means at its
disposal, "including consideration of legal action to uphold civil
liberties". The motion was put forward by the British Air Line Pilots'
Association (BALPA) in light of government plans to require workers in
aviation to enrol in the National Identity Scheme in 2009. The motion
states: "Congress sees absolutely no value in the scheme or in
improvements to security that might flow from this exercise and feels
that aviation workers are being used as pawns in a politically led
process which might lead to individuals being denied the right to work
because they are not registered or chose not to register in the scheme."
The motion puts unions on a collision course with the government over
civil liberties and contradicts government spin that "unions approve ID
cards" issued after the Labour Party National Policy Forum at Warwick at
the end of July.

Quote:
The Home Office has almost given up pretending that its ID scheme is necessary for national security. Those involved in aviation security day-to-day don't believe it. Now the plan is that ID will confront us in the workplace - as a form of official permission to earn a living. We are delighted that the unions and their members will be ready to fight it."
As I said in another post..At the meeting with the Home office, they actually stressed that the requirement for us to have the ID had nothing to do with Anti-Terrorism. In fact that was the only time it was mentioned in the entire meeting. We did go expecting them to bang on about security and were surprised that they took this path. As it says above, they seem to have given up on that one. That is not to say that Government is not still saying that, they don't know how to change the mantra in the face of defeat.
Quote:
The motion puts unions on a collision course with the government over
civil liberties and contradicts government spin that "unions approve ID
cards" issued after the Labour Party National Policy Forum at Warwick at
the end of July.
The vote at the TUC congress was from the collective delegates. It would be wrong to assume that some of the National Officers at Warwick were giving any indication that they were against ID cards.
The GMB delegate seemed to have lost the plot at congress and had no idea what the arguments were. Thankfully BALPA used the right of reply and more or less said that. I do still think that the arguments that BALPA put over were not necessarily the best I've heard, but, at least they stood up to be counted and the outcome was positive. (I am not a member of BALPA)

and lastly:

Who gave the speech? Jim McAuslan?

Do you have a link to the transcript?
Even better.....BBC Iplayer still has the whole conference....For those not Union minded (unless it suits) the relevant part of the video is on the time line at 2.33.50. to save you watching all the other stuff
TUC Conference: 2008: 10/09/2008

Having re listened to the speech. I think he may have done better than I first thought. It is difficult at congress as you only get 7 minutes to put the motion across. The second speaker for 'Prospect' made some of the missing points.
Stick with it BALPA reply to the bad speech from the GMB representative.
UCU representative makes very good points.

>>Even better.....BBC Iplayer still has the whole conference...<<

Just spent ten minutes trawling their website to no avail . . .

Could you post the link here?

Mind you, a fight with the Unions just before a General Election might just be the thing that breaks the Camel's Back or the Torpedo that sinks the Ailing Sink (or whatever the appropriate metaphor is ...)

Personally, I'm delighted by this news.

Wonderful news!

Now all we need is a group to fight for the non-EU nationals and foreign students.

It is excellent news and quite historical as well. Labour have always been welded to the unions, it is pretty much their reason for being in the first place. A party that has gained power through issues to do with the rights of workers not to get exploited by monopoly business. As Guy pointed out a short while back they originally came from the feudalism we had in England and how they would just reduce the wages to the point where the workers were no better than prisoners.

Now the unions are still aligned to this cause, but the Labour Party have been the ones that have drifted so far to the cause of the monopolisers that I expect this is the straw that will break the camels back. The issue has been brewing for years, the unions have had their powers curtailed and now they have lost political representation that they are still paying for.

No wonder they are not happy and really it is time they should realise they need to make a stand. They really don't have an option except to reverse everything they believe in and stand for, and to stab their members in the back. They can't do that or they will go down the plughole with the party they are aligned to. So this is the only option, to show their members they are true to their cause and fight with all the might they have. If they do this they will gain both independence and power. Real political power cannot be bought, it has to be earned, and in a democratic society people are constantly voting with their feet.

It seems that Ms. Hillier disagrees with my analysis

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7630088.stm
(no reference to the deck chairs, I note!)


But what is this "quicker than possible" business? Does Meg mean that Brown is delusional, or just bad at planning? Or are we about to hear about more delays?

Presumably she means that Brown is piling on the pressure to get the system running and wants it sooner than is actually feasible.

Totalitarianism, shurely?