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

McKay said: "Issue an ID card instead of a birth certificate? "

Shhhh! I think "they" are already planning some uses for those RFID tags... And *I* refuse to have one implanted, even it I get to choose where it goes!



SC

If little boy babies had their RFID tag inserted in the end of their willies and little girl babies had theirs inserted into their left nipple imagine the fun in about twenty years time when you went to check in for a flight or cashed a cheque.

Morning Teasswill

I was thinking not of the cost of an individual card , rather the predicted costs of setting up the whole damned scheme. If it is anything like the Scottish Assembly building the 'real' cost could sustain 100,s of Bobbies for years. We might even entice a certain one out of his 159mph Vectra!

Novo

Terrorism is undoubtedly a red herring in this particular issue, but I'm not sure crime is.

What having ID cards willprevent is opportunist crime like the use of somebodies elses benefit book. It costs the government billions each year and is mostly committed in the most unsophisticated way possible, and no amount of extra bobies will stop it.

Morning Blues

I follow your point, but what is the current "estimate" of the cost of the hardware/software/set-up charge/admin etc. for the proposed scheme? Or has anyone got an real idea?

If benefit fraud is really costing us ( not "the Government" ) billions
each year what percentage of that do you think would be stopped by I D cards, particularly when we have about 1.5 million people on Benefits who could apparently work. I estimate that as a minimum based on £70 /week that costs us £ 5,460,000,000..seems astronomic but I have checked a few times!

Novo

Ah, you're thinking of a different type of fraud, presumably those claiming benefits that they are not entitled too. A serious problem, but ID cards won't solve that.

I was talking about actually the most expensive type of fraud, which is benefit books going 'missing' in the post, or simply being 'borrowed by somebody from a 'mate's' house.

Whooo there, lets think this through. ID cards are going to reduce fraudulent use of stolen benefit books, so every piece of paper based transaction has to be indexed to a persaonl ID card. So the DHSS has to imprint the benefit book with an ID card code, and the bank everytime it issues a cheque book, and the bus company when it issues your pensioners pass. Why stop at paper, lets link this magic solution to plastic cards. Nightmare alert

The only reason the government wants ID cards is to give plod a valid excuse for stop and search.

'Plod' already have a valid excuse for stop and search. It's called 'reasonable suspicion'.

And no, you don't need to alter the books, you need a piece of photographic evidence that the name on the book matches the name of the person collecting the benefit.

"Whooo there, lets think this through. ID cards are going to reduce fraudulent use of stolen benefit books, so every piece of paper based transaction has to be indexed to a persaonl ID card. So the DHSS has to imprint the benefit book with an ID card code, and the bank everytime it issues a cheque book, and the bus company when it issues your pensioners pass."

WTF!!!
What's all that about? It's simple, your benefit book/cheque book/bus pass all bear your name already... So why make things complicated...

Your ID card has your name and photo on it - if the name on the checkbook matches the name on the id card and the photo on the id card matches the face of the person applying then that's all you need... Why the hell would you want to re-format every single piece of official paper in the world with an ID number?

---------------

The only reason the government wants ID cards is to give plod a valid excuse for stop and search.

The problem is that there are two completely separate issues here which people who don't want ID cards seem to blend into one to suit their needs....

(1) The issuing of a national ID card
(2) The legal requirement of carrying that card and producing it on demand.

Now, as for stop & search rules, I'll leave that to Blues , he'll probably know more about the procedures than me - but I'd hazard that if the police really want to stop someone - they don't need an additional excuse... Added to the fact that they really haven't got the time to spend hassling people for ID cards every day.

Now, a serious question for all you in the UK... Has the government, at any stage, stated that they would bring into effect N° 2 on my list?

Simulpost - you got there first (and managed to answer in 1/4 of the number of words!)

Hi Whisky

I have a card that lets me use local leisure services free. I have a bus pass becuase I am over 60. Both have a photo of me ( though I don't think I look like that really!). So are these not a form of ID Card already?

If Plod wants to stop me ( whilst doing 159mph) I can produce
either card and clearly confirm that I am who I say I am.

Benefit fraud in addition to that I posted on is a foreign land to me. I don't have Blu's expertise on this , but cards like mine ,Issued with the relevent books would solve that I think.
I have always accepted that a card with at least photographic confirmation should be required to access the benefits of the state, but how would that help someone who is old, frail, bedbound etc and who cannot get to the appropriate benefit ofice?

Finally, I don't remeber the government saying that we would be compelled to carry cards - but I bet that if they can think of a good enough reason they will make sure we have to, by fair means or foul.

Novo

Incidently, there is perfectly adequate technology to maintain a data base to hold this information, and the procedures exsist to make it secure. They are however expensive, and include a human element - this makes it unlikely that the people bidding for the government business will include it. Whilst bids are no longer automatically won by the cheapest option, cost remains a feature.

if the government insists on making id cards cumpolsury then they should be free,at least for those on pensions or benefits

Hi Novo.

I think I'm right in saying that carrying an I.D card is not compulsary to the extent that you would be in immediate trouble if you "fail to produce your papers, comrade." However, I think you do get served a notice to present them within a fixed period, I dunno, say 36 hours at your local Police Station - a bit like having a broken tail light on a car.

This is why, incidentally, it is a useless scheme to combat terrorism.
"Excuse...excuse me Mr Bin laden. Oh I'm sorry, yes the resembelnce is striking. Do you have any identification, Mr Smith of Basinstoke?"

"Er...no, I must have left it in my other trousers."

"That's all right just make sure you turn up to Bethnal Police Station before 5pm on Friday."

"Heathrow? Yes take the picadilly line to..."

Half-measures are the curse of it. The Government wouldn't want to be seen to be instituting a compulsary identification scheme, lest it came across as somehow authoritarian, nor does it want to reverse on the issue for fear of being "soft on terrorism."
So instead we are lumbered with the scheme the government are determined to force through and some more promises in the name of peace and security that aren't worth the paper the memos condemning those responsible aren't written on.

It would be handy to have an easy way to prove my identity. I don't have a passport or drivers license. Dealing with the council is a headache because (amoung other things) it takes me ages to prove who I am. My student card is not considered valid evidence (Because obviously a person would go through a three year course at not inconsiderable expense just to obtain a false ID)

However the cost does not justify the convenience. The other effects may or may not come to pass. There doesn't appear to be sufficient evidence to say. It's not worth putting a scheme into place at this level of expense without knowing if it will work.

Besides which, being able to show who I am doesn't help if nobody knows what this means. There are at least four govornment databases holding my information, there is contradictory information and there is redundant information. If they cannot handle the information they already have on me efficiently and accurately I do not see the justifycation for giving them more.

I don't care two hoots about my privacy. I think privacy is something society would be a lot better off without (Though I respect other peoples because they don't share my view) I am not willing to pay for no reason, either directly through being forced to buy the thing, or indirectly through taxation to pay for the setup cost.

Loved the post Clive

Best laugh of the day , set me up for the rest of it!, it being Monday.

Thanks
Novo

Ferpectly alright. Pity it took 24 hours for me to be able to read it.

(I still say M****y should be called it Sodit.)

Being able to prove who you are could be handy, in a properly implemented system.

Unfortunately, when other reasons are used to justify ID cards, such as their yet-to-be-explained capacity to prevent terrorism, people naturally react with wariness.

If the cards will save a huge amount of money from benefit fraud, then let the social security budget pay for them for people on benefits.

Expecting people applying for passports to subsidise the system for everyone else seems a bit unfair, especially when the suspicion is that the project will probably be as ineptly handled as every other government IT project, and will end up with rich consultants and probably the odd directorship or other backhander for those involved at some point in the future.

If government ministers and senior civil servants supporting the scheme were to bet their careers and pensions on the system being completed on schedule, working and within budget, people may be less skeptical, but we know that's not going to happen.

Except people aren't responding warily. The majority of people asked in surveys, time and again have said, 'Yeah, No problem. I have nothing to hide and the government already has all this stuff if it really wants it. I just don't like the idea of having to pay for it' (which is why it's been linked to passports in the first instance).

I'd be very wary of concluding that just because a generally left leaning web site with a very small cross-section of views thinks they are a bad idea that the population at large does.

I'd be interested in seeing exactly how those questions were worded. From what I recall the figures in support of the scheme vary quite dramatically between surveys.

Also I'd like to know where all these people in broad support of the scheme are. I've not met a single one in real life, and my friends could hardly all be called generally left-leaning.