Moderators: John, Sharon, Fossil, Lucky Poet, crusty_bint, Jazza, dazza
Apollo wrote:I wouldn't count on it, they may not come into force as such, but unless the bill is defeated, they will be forced to spend pots of our money pursuing the idea and technology, or lose face.
The sad thing about it is, if they'd been more reasonable and less alarmist, then they could have crept the whole whole thing in by applying proper stealth.
Passports have gone down the route already, and are accepted world-wide.
Majority of folk have them, and they could have issued free passports to us non-travellers, chargeble if we wish to leave the country.
The technology is already in place, so could have been adapted for "entitlement" use, and additional data stored. I understand the passport has greater data strorage than was ever considered for the ID card, as it was supposed to use compression technology and smart data.
New biometric or other technology could have been sneaked in on renewal, or a claim that upgrade revisions were needed.
That's only a minute's thought, and even that makes you wonder why the had to make it so controversial.
Apollo wrote:Back on topic
A separate survey of 2,000 respondents showed only 8% believed the data would be safe from criminals, and 23% had no faith that the government would not misuse personal data. Only 5% trusted private firms to run a National ID register.
The train enters the station. Uniformed police officers appear on the platform and surround me. They must immediately notice my French accent, still strong after living more than 12 years in London.
They handcuff me, hands behind my back, and take my rucksack out of my sight. They explain that this is for my safety, and that they are acting under the authority of the Terrorism Act. I am told that I am being stopped and searched because:
· they found my behaviour suspicious from direct observation and then from watching me on the CCTV system;
· I went into the station without looking at the police officers at the entrance or by the gates;
· two other men entered the station at about the same time as me;
· I am wearing a jacket "too warm for the season";
· I am carrying a bulky rucksack, and kept my rucksack with me at all times;
· I looked at people coming on the platform;
· I played with my phone and then took a paper from inside my jacket.
At the moment the items of sensitive personal data in the ID Card database are very limited. For example, the central database will include a photograph of the ID card holder. If that photograph reveals a certain medical condition, for instance, Downs Syndrome or blindness, then clearly these photographic data reveal sensitive personal data. Additionally, sensitive personal data would be processed if photographic identity data were used in a racial context – for example, if the authorities searched the database to distinguish, say, an Afro-Caribbean Fred Bloggs from a Caucasian Fred Bloggs. Sensitive personal data could also be revealed if the address of the Cardholder relates to a mental hospital or a prison.
Sensitive personal data will also be contained as the central registry database is to contain "access records". The Bill states that these "access records" include "particulars of every occasion on which a person has accessed an individual's entry and of the person who accessed it". Thus if an individual with an ID card uses an NHS service which requires a check on entitlement for free treatment, there will be a record in the ID Card database which describes that check – in particular 'first outpatient clinics' which has been identified by Health Ministers.
The record of which clinic the patient attends, however, can give inferential detail of the individual's medical condition. After all, patients who attend at a sexually transmitted diseases outpatient clinic or a pre-natal maternity clinic are not queuing for a flu jab.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests