There are some unwarranted speculations in it, however, and it is worth going through and picking out what’s not true, because what’s left is quite frightening enough. This is long, sorry.

You may have heard that legislation creating compulsory ID Cards passed a crucial stage in the House of Commons.

Actually it is now the Identity Cards Act 2006, and (after a strange and
...continue Fisking ‘the anonymous email’]]> There has been a chain email doing the rounds. It seems to have caught the public imagination to the extent of being used as a source by at least three well-known national columnists to my knowledge.

There are some unwarranted speculations in it, however, and it is worth going through and picking out what’s not true, because what’s left is quite frightening enough. This is long, sorry.

You may have heard that legislation creating compulsory ID Cards passed a crucial stage in the House of Commons.

Actually it is now the Identity Cards Act 2006, and (after a strange and unprecedented delay in getting the final text published, and, unlike all other Acts at time of writing, only in pdf) is now available on the Cabinet Office website here (pdf).

You may feel that ID cards are not something to worry about, since we already have Photo ID for our Passport and Driving License and an ID Card will be no different to that. What you have not been told is the full scope of this proposed ID Card, and what it will mean to you personally.

The proposed ID Card will be different from any card you now hold. It will be connected to a database called the NIR, (National Identity Register)., where all of your personal details will be stored.

Not, quite, all.

This will include the unique number that will be issued to you, your fingerprints, a scan of the back of your eye,

The biometrics to be used have not been finalised, but probably won’t use retinal scanning (the back of the eye) which is more difficult and potentially dangerous. Home Office efforts have concentrated on iris scanning, which detects patterns on the front of the eye using ordinary visible light.

and your photograph. Your name, address and date of birth will also obviously be stored there.

Not quite so obviously, it will also include all names by which you are known (though the extent of this is very unclear: will they want your chatroom handles?), and all your residences (not contact addresses) anywhere in the world will be required.

There will be spaces on this database for your religion,

Not according to the Act. Though it could be included later under a statutory instrument. The Act permits almost every aspect of the scheme to be altered or extended by regulation.

residence status, and many other private and personal facts about you.

True.

There is unlimited space for every other details of your life on the NIR database,

Not true. It is not quite as bad as that, but also much worse. The NIR cannot be unlimited, but it will act as an index to all the details of you life held on other databases if any of the details held in it is used as a key by another organisation – as it will be highly convenient to do.

which can be expanded by the Government with or without further Acts of Parliament.

Which is true.

By itself, you might think that this register is harmless, but you would be wrong to come to this conclusion. This new card will be used to check your identity against your entry in the register in real time, whenever you present it to ‘prove who you are’.

Or indeed, if you do not present a card, but just give your number.

Every place that sells alcohol or cigarettes, every post office, every pharmacy, and every Bank will have an NIR Card Terminal, (very much like the Chip and Pin Readers that are everywhere now) into which your card can be ‘swiped’ to check your identity.

This is speculation. But it is likely the banks will be encouraged to use ID verification at every opportunity to comply with FSA “Know your Customer” requirements and the Money Laundering Regulations, as a way of cutting their own risks and costs. Home Office minister Hazel Blears told Bloomberg TV in October 2004 that there would be a biometric scanner in every doctor’s surgery.

Each time this happens, a record is made at the NIR of the time and place that the Card was presented.

True. This is an explicit aim of the Act.

This means for example, that there will be a government record of every time you withdraw more than £99 at your branch of NatWest, who now demand ID for these transactions. Every time you have to prove that you are over 18, your card will be swiped, and a record made at the NIR. Restaurants and off licenses will demand that your card is swiped so that each receipt shows that they sold alcohol to someone over 18, and that this was proved by the access to the NIR, indemnifying them from prosecution.

Speculation. Cash withdrawals could be tracked another way, in any case, if your bank account is tagged with your ID details for KYC reasons. Though the Home Office has conducted research into people’s reactions to producing the card for purchases of more than £100 and verification (i.e. a permanent NIR record) for purchases of more than £200, no plans to do this have been announced. Likewise with age checks. Home Office ministers have implied this might be a way in which ID cards would be useful to the public (“instead of having to carry around one’s passport”). And the Home Office itself also appears to have stepped back a little from its sponsorship of private age verification schemes. But no plans have been announced to compel ID card use for any of these things.

Private businesses are going to be given access to the NIR Database.

Not given. Sold. Perhaps with a bit of arm twisting. Ministers make a largely spurious distinction between access, provision of information and verification of information, but it is highly unlikely anyone outside the Home Office and Security Service will get unlimited browsing or searching rights.

If you want to apply for a job, you will have to present your card for a swipe.

With large firms, this may become true. One of the objectives of the scheme constantly reiterated is to prevent ‘illegal working’ and a whole segment of the NIR is to be deveoted to immigration/residential status, which employers are under an obligation to check. Smaller firms, one supposes will be compelled to keep records of their staff’s NIR numbers – though since national insurance numbers are to be indexed by the NIR, they would do as well – or use a verification agency, perhaps.

If you want to apply for a London Underground Oyster Card,or a supermarket loyalty card, or a driving license you will have to present your ID Card for a swipe. The same goes for getting a telephone line or a mobile phone or an internet account.

Speculation. Though it would be very convenient for large organisations that need or want a name and address to get them this way.

Driving licenses are one of the key documents that have been considered for ‘designated document’ status, i.e. registering on or verifying an existing registration on the NIR would be a condition of having one. But no designation has yet taken place. The Home Office will do it later by regulation.

Mobile phones on the other hand, are one of the items that the Home Office expressly sets its ambition to control through ID cards, in the Regulatory Impact Assessment issued in 2004. Others are renting property,and staying in an hotel.

Oyster, DVLA, BT and Nectar (for example) all run very detailed databases of their own.

True. And these would be neatly indexed by use of (guaranteed unique and government-checked) NIR numbers, which may make NIR numbers irresistable to include. Which would also be very convenient for official investigators who want information about individual’s use of these services.

They will be allowed access to the NIR, just as every other business will be.

Just not true. Certain NIR checks may be compulsory for businesses in due course. But the Act makes clear use and sharing of the data is for government purposes – anything whatsoever the government of the day may seem fit, but government purposes only. The Secretary of State may provide certain information to non-government organisations for ‘verification’, or where they are subcontracted to exercise government functions.

This means that each of these entities will be able to store your unique number in their database, and place all your travel, phone records, driving activities and detailed shopping habits under your unique NIR number.

True, in effect, though it doesn’t follow from NIR access, which they won’t get, but the convenience of cross-referencing once such organisations can be sure they are using a common unique key.

These databases, which can easily fit on a storage device the size of your hand, will be sold to third parties either legally or illegally.

We are actually talking about HUGE data volumes here, so the storage of whole databases and their exchange in physical form is fiction. But the legal and illegal trade in personal data is already a fact. NIR-referencing would make it more valuable and more flexible.

It will then be possible for a non governmental entity to create a detailed dossier of all your activities. Certainly, the government will have clandestine access to all of them, meaning that they will have a complete record of all your movements, from how much and when you withdraw from your bank account to what medications you are taking, down to the level of what sort of bread you eat – all accessible via a single unique number in a central database.

Non-governmental possibly. Through cross-referencing of those private databases they could afford access to, though, not a single magic button. Though why would they want to, except as they do now to sell you things?

Only governments (and kidnappers, blackmailers) really want to know all your activities. And government would not need ‘clandestine’ access, it has open powers both formal and informal to requisition information for investigatory purposes. Nor would it have a single magic button. (The equivalent solution in practice would involve lots of official forms and firms delivering up specified information.)

The other government use, which is wholly impractical now (though individuals can be investigated with time and trouble), but facilitated by such a system, is the ‘fishing exhibition’. This is clearly adumbrated in the short Home Office paper reviewing ‘benefits’ of the scheme for parliamentarians (though lodged in the Commons Libarary too late for any of them actually to read it before the relevant vote). The department wants to know the name and residences of everyone who owns a white van but has not yet submitted tax return this year? Cross references using the NIR make that (in principle) straightforward.

This is quite a significant leap from a simple ID Card that shows your name and face. Most people do not know that this is the true character and scope of the proposed ID Card. Whenever the details of how it will work are explained to them, they quickly change from being ambivalent towards it.

The Government is going to COMPEL you to enter your details into the NIR and to carry this card. If you and your children want to obtain or renew your passports, you will be forced to have your fingerprints taken and your eyes scanned for the NIR, and an ID Card will be issued to you whether you want one or not. If you refuse to be fingerprinted and eye scanned, you will not be able to get a passport.

All true. Though children below 16 will not, for the moment, be eligible to be entered on the NIR.

Your ID Card will, just like your passport, not be your property. The Home Secretary will have the right to revoke or suspend your ID at any time, meaning that you will not be able to withdraw money from your Bank Account, for example, or do anything that requires you to present your government issued ID Card.

True. Though perhaps not the bank-account bit, as mentioned above. He might also confiscate it temporarily if you were suspected of being a football hooligan, since all legislation that applies to passports is extended to ID cards.

The arguments that have been put forwarded in favour of ID Cards can be easily disproved. ID Cards WILL NOT stop terrorists; every Spaniard has a compulsory ID Card as did the Madrid Bombers. ID Cards will not eliminate benefit fraud’, which in comparison, is small compared to the astronomical cost of this proposal, which will be measured in billions according to the LSE (London School of Economics).

Actually, even the government admits billions. The LSE suggests tens of billions. Counting in all third party costs, that may be a modest estimate.

This scheme exists solely to exert total surveillance and control over the ordinary free British Citizen,and it will line the pockets of the companies that will create the computer systems at the expense of your freedom,privacy and money.

If you did not know the full scope of the proposed ID Card Scheme before and you are as unsettled as I am at what it really means to you, to this country and its way of life, I urge you to email or photocopy this and give it to your friends and colleagues and everyone else you think should know and who cares. The Bill has proceeded to this stage due to the lack of accurate and complete information on this proposal being made public. Together & Hand to hand, we can inform the entire nation if everyone who receives this passes it on.

Lord Gould of Brookwood: Both the previous speakers—the latter with great emotion—were arguing for freedom. We have to ask what greater freedom is there than the freedom to place a vote for a political party in a ballot box upon the basis of a mandate and a manifesto. That is the crux of it: the people have supported this measure. That is what the noble Earl’s father fought for.
...continue A new kind of freedom]]> As the report stage of the Identity Cards Bill approaches in the Lords, a reminder of one highlight from the first day of the committee stage Hansard, 15 Nov 2005, Col.1012:

Lord Gould of Brookwood: Both the previous speakers—the latter with great emotion—were arguing for freedom. We have to ask what greater freedom is there than the freedom to place a vote for a political party in a ballot box upon the basis of a mandate and a manifesto. That is the crux of it: the people have supported this measure. That is what the noble Earl’s father fought for. But that is too trivial an answer. I know that. The fundamental argument is that the truth is that people believe that these identity cards will affirm their identity. The noble Lord opposite said that he likes to be in this House and how he is recognised in this House because it is a community that recognises him. That is how the people of this nation feel. They feel that they are part of communities, and they want recognition. For them, recognition comes in the form of this identity card. Noble Lords may think that that is strange, but it is what they feel. This is their kind of freedom. They want their good, hard work and determination to be recognised, rewarded and respected. That is what this does.

Of course it is right and honourable for noble Lords to have their views, but I say there is another view, and it is the view of the majority of this country. They want to have the respect, recognition and freedom that this card will give them. Times have changed. Politics have changed. What would not work 50 years ago, works now. It is not just me. I have the words of the leader of your party:

“I have listened to the police and security service chiefs. They have told me that ID cards can and will help their efforts to protect the lives of British citizens against terrorist acts. How can I disregard that?”.

This is not some silly idea of the phoney left. It is a mainstream idea of modern times. It is a new kind of identity and a new kind of freedom. I respect the noble Lords’ views, but it would help if they respected the fact that the Bill and the identity cards represent the future: a new kind of freedom and a new kind of identity.

This is the sort of rhetoric that makes my blood run cold. Here’s a prefiguring example:

In our state the individual is not deprived of freedom. In fact, he has greater liberty than an isolated man, because the state protects him and he is part of the State. Isolated man is without defence.

– Benito Mussolini.

Terry Eagleton (from a review of Paxton’s Anatomy of Fascism in the New Statesman) elucidates the connection:

Conservatives disdain the popular masses, while fascists mobilise and manipulate them. Some conservatives believe in ideas, but fascists have a marked preference for myths. If they think at all, they think through their blood, not their brain. Fascists regard themselves as a youthful, revolutionary avant-garde out to erase the botched past and create an unimaginably new future.

All supporters of the old-fashioned conception of individual liberty, whether they think of themselves as left or right, conservative or progressive, must do what can be done. Resist. We should not expect any quarter for outdated ideas under a new kind of freedom.

[cross-posted to Samizdata]

Microsoft has warned that the U.K.’s national identity card plans pose a security risk that could increase the likelihood of confidential data falling into the hands of criminals.

It is frustrating that after months of debate, it is still news. I guess the real news is that it is Microsoft saying that. I particularly like this bit:

Jerry Fishenden, a top security and identity management expert at Microsoft, said that the British government’s current technology proposals are flawed. He also criticized other technology suppliers for failing to speak
...continue Microsoft exec: ID cards pose security risk]]> CNET News.com reports what we have knowns for some time…

Microsoft has warned that the U.K.’s national identity card plans pose a security risk that could increase the likelihood of confidential data falling into the hands of criminals.

It is frustrating that after months of debate, it is still news. I guess the real news is that it is Microsoft saying that. I particularly like this bit:

Jerry Fishenden, a top security and identity management expert at Microsoft, said that the British government’s current technology proposals are flawed. He also criticized other technology suppliers for failing to speak out publicly about their concerns for fear of damaging any future bids for part of the lucrative contract for ID cards.

So what are the 30 coins worth to a technology supplier, I wonder? But before we rejoice too much, Mr Fishenden is not on concerned about the issue of ID cards and biometrics in the first place, just about a more secure and efficient way of gathering and storing the data:

I have concerns with the current architecture and the way it looks at aggregating so much personal information and biometrics in a single place. There are better ways of doing this. Even the biometrics industry says it is better to have biometrics stored locally.

By 2050 earlier, probably — all real knowledge of Oldspeak will have disappeared. The whole literature of the past will have been destroyed. Chaucer, Shakespeare, Milton, Byron — they’ll exist only in Newspeak versions, not merely changed into something different, but actually changed into something contradictory of what they used to be. Even the literature of the Party will change. Even the slogans will change. How could you have a slogan like “freedom is slavery” when the concept of freedom has been abolished? The whole climate of thought will be different. In fact there will be no thought,
...continue Literalmindedness and the redefinition of thought]]> Compare this:

By 2050 earlier, probably — all real knowledge of Oldspeak will have disappeared. The whole literature of the past will have been destroyed. Chaucer, Shakespeare, Milton, Byron — they’ll exist only in Newspeak versions, not merely changed into something different, but actually changed into something contradictory of what they used to be. Even the literature of the Party will change. Even the slogans will change. How could you have a slogan like “freedom is slavery” when the concept of freedom has been abolished? The whole climate of thought will be different. In fact there will be no thought, as we understand it now. Orthodoxy means not thinking — not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness.

Syme {no relation} in 1984

with this:

People’s names are already on a large number of databases.
Most of us have dozens of cards in our wallets with our identities on. We
already have a Big Brother society. ID cards mean identity fraud can be dealt with and stopped. ID cards are a means of controlling the Big Brother society rather than creating it. Big Brother society is already here.

Charles Clarke, quoted in the Eastern Daily Press today.

Controlling the Big Brother society might sound like preventing it, restraining it. But your expectations deceive you. Forget literary allusion. “Big Brother society” means whatever the establishment defines it to mean.

Now consider only the words, how they literally fit together. Big Brother society = our society. ID cards are a means of controlling society.

The latest splendid animation from Will Flash for Cash Productions in aid of the UK campaign against ID cards is here, and will explain the title of the post.

For those who missed it, their earlier biting attack on Mr Secretary Clarke and the glorious scheme using a cute musical puppy is here.

Welcome to a strange world. Sound, and familiarity with British political figures, most definitely an advantage.

British lawmakers voted in favor of the bill on Tuesday by an unexpectedly thin margin of 314-283. At the last minute, some members of Prime Minister Tony Blair’s Labour Party revolted against the cards, which would carry fingerprints and iris scans of cardholders and be backed by a national database containing extensive personal information.

A Home Office spokeswoman said it’s too early to comment
...continue UK ID Card Battle Heats Up]]> Wired writes that Britain’s House of Commons this week moved forward with plans to create a new national ID card, but a sharp reversal in support for the controversial measure signals a rocky road ahead.

British lawmakers voted in favor of the bill on Tuesday by an unexpectedly thin margin of 314-283. At the last minute, some members of Prime Minister Tony Blair’s Labour Party revolted against the cards, which would carry fingerprints and iris scans of cardholders and be backed by a national database containing extensive personal information.

A Home Office spokeswoman said it’s too early to comment on the bill’s future success.

We won’t speculate on the passage of a bill through parliament. It still has an awful lot of readings to go through. Anything can happen to it.

I wouldn’t hold my breath as Tony Blair indicated that he will use a Parliament Act to force the legistration through. The struggle continues…

The LSE report The Identity Project: an assessment of the UK Identity Cards Bill and its implications is published today (27
...continue LSE report on ID cards]]> The likely cost of rolling out the UK government’s current high-tech identity cards scheme will be £10.6 billion on the ‘low cost’ estimate of researchers at the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE), without any cost over-runs or implementation problems. Key uncertainties over how citizens will behave and how the scheme will work out in practice mean that the ‘high cost’ estimate could go up to £19.2 billion. A median figure for this range is £14.5 billion.

The LSE report The Identity Project: an assessment of the UK Identity Cards Bill and its implications is published today (27 June) after a six month study guided by a steering group of 14 professors and involving extensive consultations with nearly 100 industry representatives, experts and researchers from the UK and around the world. The project was co-ordinated by the Department of Information Systems at LSE.

The LSE report concludes that an ID card system could offer some basic public interest and commercial sector benefits. But it also identifies six other key areas of concern with the government’s existing plans:

1. Multiple purposes

2. Will the technology work?
3. Is it legal?
4. Security
5. Citizens’ acceptance
6. Will ID cards benefit businesses?

To read the full text visit here. Also, you can download the executive summary of the report here and a full text (300 pages) here.

Ideal Government blog is providing a discussion space for the LSE identity project as well as for the topic of Identity cards in the UK in general. Well worth a trip over there…

His warning came as the head of the UK Passport Service said international con artists would be able to duplicate the technology within a decade. Bernard Herdan fuelled fears over the cost of the scheme by claiming the proposed
...continue No re-think on ID cards]]> Rose Prince of Mirror.co.uk writes that Tony Blair yesterday hinted he would force ID cards on the public even if they were opposed by the House of Lords. A day after the controversial scheme narrowly survived a knife-edge vote in the Commons, the Prime Minister suggested he would take a tough line with peers who tried to block his pet project.

His warning came as the head of the UK Passport Service said international con artists would be able to duplicate the technology within a decade. Bernard Herdan fuelled fears over the cost of the scheme by claiming the proposed biometric ID would need to be regularly updated to stay one step ahead of the fraudsters.

All we can do is to keep on changing the design.

Despite the growing opposition to ID cards, Mr Blair appeared to threaten the use of the Parliament Act – the device used by the House of Commons in a last resort to force legislation through the Lords.

This is insane… I wonder why?

The chairman of the Campaign Group of left-wing MPs John McDonnell, who wrote to Mr Clarke, made clear that the rebels were ready to seek compromise over his Identity Cards Bill rather than trying to wreck the legislation altogether.

Deadline is 9th October 2005, 2,934 people have signed up, 7066 more are needed. Those in the UK, please sign up.