h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

"A couple of questions arise from this. Would you be prepared to carry an ID card?"

I don't think they're a good idea at all because the government are 100% convinced they're unpiratable and criminals are usually smarter than the authorities. If someone can pirate your ID card then it's not just like forging your passport - they'll be able to do everything from leave the country to take money out to sign on with one little swipe. There's a famous saying about eggs and baskets that applies here

"And, with the government saying in advance that it will go ahead with the plans anyway, can we truly say we live in a democracy?"

We don't really live in a democracy - nobody does. We lived in a republic with monarchical baubles. We don't vote for what happens except in the rare cases of referendum, we elect people who govern however they want but who are legally obliged to hold regular general elections and therefore can be voted out of office. So, rather than do exactly what the public wants a government only pay a certain amount of heed to public opinion unless another party usurps them. In this instance, the elected Labour government is passing ID cards not beacuse there's a great public desire for them (there doesn't appear to be) but because the government is convinced they're a good idea and there's not enough public objection to make it an issue they fear losing an election over.

"live" not "lived". This site really needs an edit function.

<> (Bouncy)

Well, that does seem to be the real issue, doesn't it? Having a handy piece of photo ID (like my Spanish one) is great. As I don't have a driving license here it saves me having to carry around my passport. Also, we don't have to pay out of pocket for our ID cards (though of course we pay for them through taxes).

The smart thing would have been for the UK government to introduce simple photo ID cards like they have in the rest of Europe (which include a fingerprint and signature) and then, once people got used to having them, suggest a plan for these weirdo biometric ones.

az

Well a fingerprint is a biometric, and I suspect the citizens' rights campaigners wouldn't be too keen on that either.

Have to confess I personally feel a bit of resistance to letting my fingerprints go on a database somewhere. Not entirely sure why exactly.

I object to them for a lot of the reasons previously stated, data protection, cost, likelyhood of system malfunction/abusse and the fact that they wont do what the government claims they will do.

Terrorists who reside legally in this country and have ID cards will still want to kill people in this country because they think its a good idea and a phto ID card with bio-metric information wont change that.

Th money it will take to set up could be spent more effectively, the government already have loads of data on us and giving more tax money to incompotent and inefficient firms who have already cocked-up big style on 9other contracts ought to be a criminal offence.

one love

"
Terrorists who reside legally in this country and have ID cards will still want to kill people in this country because they think its a good idea and a phto ID card with bio-metric information wont change that."

Oh, the "stop terrorists" thing I think is bunkum. If it was ten years ago they'd probably talk them up as being good for stopping drug smugglers. Al-Quaida and other Islamist groups specifically recruit residents of a country to operate in terrorist cells there because they're the most safe as agents. Terrorists entering a country tends to happen in situations of instability and civil war (eg Iraq and Bosnia respectively) but terrorists incidents in Spain (for example) can't (and indeed weren't) stopped by any sort of ID card scheme. It's a cheap and dishonest argument for the government to use.

"Th money it will take to set up could be spent more effectively, the government already have loads of data on us and giving more tax money to incompotent and inefficient firms who have already cocked-up big style on 9other contracts ought to be a criminal offence."

I wouldn't be surprised if the enthusiasm for ID cards was created by clever marketing by some encryption company looking to have billions of taxpayers' pounds poured into its coffers. The UK government have always thrown spent what is most probably over-the-odds amounts on the services of the private sector (several thousands of pounds to a company to produce that notorious logo for the UK's heading of the European Union, anyone?) and this will be yet another example of this, I feel.

When the passport agency is found to employ a team of 9 cleaners who are all illegal immegrants, you wonder about the effectiveness of our security systems.

Nowadays companies don't employ people for menial tasks, they outsource it to a servicing company who provide them with security guards, cleaners, maintainence people, etc.

Now when you outsource your cleaning, how can they save money ? The staff are already probably minimum wage - there's a bit of saving on bulk buying your cleaning products, but they won't run a company. So you cut corners on the cleaning - reduce the time it takes from 3 hours to 2, that type of thing. But another way is to pay people cash, avoiding tax and all other sorts of costly things.

The government believes that making people produce an identity card when they apply for a job will boost the economy and drive illegal workers out of the country. Part of the reason we're so popular with illegal immegrants is that its so easy to find work. So they think coupling an id card with legislation (and heavy fines) aimed at companies will produce a lot of money and stop the black market.

I can't see why there is a problem with ID cards.
Will we have to pay a lot of money for them?

That's a good point, not only might you have to pay a good deal for RFID cards (since they have circuits, etc.) but intelligent people may want to buy some added protection as well:

http://www.difrwear.com/products.shtml

Added protection? You mean like tearing off some kitchen foil?

An interesting ethical point has just occured to me. My dogs are chipped. The chip was inserted in the scruff of their neck when thay were 10 weeks old. Their details are held on a National database and anybody with a reader can scan their chip.

I can't see any downside. It protects them from being sold legitimately if they were stolen, it traces them back to me if they went missing, it reassures the vet that he treating the correct animal and it enables them to travel to foreign parts with a pet passport.

All very simple, cost effective and useful. Why don't we chip children?

I always thought chipping children would be a very good idea. I've heard a lot about people suggesting it, and how the chip can be removed or deactivated when they reach 18 if they so wish. Of course, kidnappers would just chop it out so it wouldn't help with that, but it does seem like it could be incredibly useful.

I find it hard to believe that some posters are approaching this with any degree of common sense. 'Chipping'children for Bob's sake, what Orwellian planet are we on here?

Blicky is right. Biometric cards will cost the earth, and as sure as God made Apples they wont be foolproof, nor will they remain secret and uncounterfeitable ( new word? )for very long either.

A card wth one's picture on it would be sufficient, as Azahar describes.

Biometric versions are nothing more that another grandiose left wing 'control' idea, and it surprises me that more posters dont see it. I know SWL is given to hyperbole, but is essence he is right. The street cameras photograph us all about 300 times a day ( allegedly).Just suppose they were capable of realy high definition - not only would the watchers know where you were, they may be able to consult a Db which can match you image, so they could know who you are as well.

Is that really a vision of the country that you are comfortable with ?

It certainly isn't what thousands fought and died for in two world wars.
It is more a Stalinist view of life, and 'subjects'

Novo

I'm with you on that.

In my rural village with a low crime rate, the primary school adjacent to our village hall has installed CCTV cameras. To my mind they're certainly not cost effective, neccessary nor desirable. Although no-one is actually watching the screens out of school hours, I am not entirely happy to feel that I cannot pass by unobserved - the record is there.

If I was attacked somewhere & CCTV footage was crucial in bringing the attacker to court, I might be glad of it. But I wonder just what percentage of crimes do benefit from the attendant CCTV monitoring? It certainly doesn't seem to have done much to deter criminals.

I don't believe that any ID card system would be foolproof, nor would it in any way increase security. Surely what we need is to promote communities where people know & support each other - more good neighbourliness.

<If I was attacked somewhere & CCTV footage was crucial in bringing the attacker to court, I might be glad of it. But I wonder just what percentage of crimes do benefit from the attendant CCTV monitoring? It certainly doesn't seem to have done much to deter criminals.>

If there wa an attendant watching the screen. If not the police would not look back through the footage as 'they do not have the man-power'. The reason given on You and Yours on BBCR4 that a caller described. They were attacked but the CCTV footage was not looked at. Great. Just say you are a cute kid and they would be over the footage like a rash.

On the subject of CCTV Cameras, there are more than 4 million of them in Britain now. That's 1 for every 14 people, overkill or what ?

And how many watchers are sitting in front of banks of screens, watching, and operating these cameras: who pays them, and who pays for their uniforms ( I'll bet they have one)?.

It is a whole 'industry'..... yet another one which makes nothing but paperwork.

Novo

There was a case in Liverpool where the camera operators focussed it through a woman's bedroom curtains.

Another aspect of ID cards - suppose you can't afford one ? Then what happens ? Already clubs in some towns insist on seeing ID before you can enter. Some of my daughter's friends have never been abroad - they have no passport, they can't afford driving lessons, so have no license, and they won't accept birth certificates because they have no photo.

Is this a way of making sure the kids in your night-club have daddy's who can afford to pay for any damage ?

Yes.

<<"Already clubs in some towns insist on seeing ID before you can enter.">>

Uh, clubs and pubs just about everywhere will insist on seeing ID if you look like you could be underage. With the law as it is, I don't see what is wrong with this?

A provisional drivers' licence is 20 quid, and lasts two or three years. I reckon if you can afford to be drinking or to pay the entrance for a club (usually at least a few quid even with a student discount) then you can afford that.

But that's typical middle-class thinking - these people don't have cars - why should they get a driving license.