A sample text widget
Etiam pulvinar consectetur dolor sed malesuada. Ut convallis
euismod dolor nec pretium. Nunc ut tristique massa.
Nam sodales mi vitae dolor ullamcorper et vulputate enim accumsan.
Morbi orci magna, tincidunt vitae molestie nec, molestie at mi. Nulla nulla lorem,
suscipit in posuere in, interdum non magna.
|
David Blunkett said (on April 7) that he was pushing on with plan for an ID card, with a draft bill to hit Parliament within months. The ID cards will contain biometrics and may be in the wallets of UK citizens by 2007 at the earliest. Blunkett told Radio Five Live that the introduction is necessary to give the government better control over immigration and prevent terrorists using multiple identities.
Blunkett, however, acknowledged that getting compulsory ID cards into law wouldn’t be an easy process. “It would be very surprising if there were not misgivings,” he said. A number of high-profile Cabinet colleagues have expressed objections to the scheme, including Home Secretary Jack Straw and Trade and Industry Minister Patricia Hewitt.
He also admitted there were practical issues to be overcome before the cards were made compulsory. Among them, that Parliament could only vote on the issue of making the cards compulsory when 80 per cent of UK citizens carried them anyway and that estimates of how much the introduction would cost the taxpayer differ wildly – from around £1bn to around £3bn.
While biometrics are high on the UK government’s love list, the rest of the Europe is taking a step back from the idea.
The civil liberties wing of the European Parliament has delayed proposals for biometric passports until the tail end of this year, after elections to the parliament have taken place. MEP Ole Sørensen said
The European Parliament is [currently] not in a position to endorse the proposals… We need proper democratic scrutiny of this far-reaching legislation, which in the worst case scenario could represent a step towards systematic registration of EU citizens’ personal data.
I am currently re-reading Are We At War?, a collection of letters to the Times 1939-1945. (Pub. Times Books 1989.) Here are some extracts from letters on the subject of identity cards:
From a letter from Antony Wells:
Sir, -While obtaining, recently, a National Registration identity card for my small daughter, I remarked that it was pleasant to think all this bothersome business would soon no longer be necessary. I was blandly informed by the clerk that my expectation was quite wrong, since registration was to continue after the war. On looking at the card in my hand, I discovered it was valid until 1960.
In happy fact, identity cards were seen off as a result of a court case soon after the war. But the fact that the government saw fit to plan for them to expire so many years after issue shows how purported “emergency measures” have a way of becoming permanent. The letter was written in December 1944 and the war was quite clearly nearing its end; the government could not have seriously believed it would go on until 1960.
This second extract comes from a letter from (Baron) Quickswood:
…Such cards may seem only a small inconvenience, but they are seriously dangerous to liberty in two ways: -First, they facilitate all sorts of further regimentation of citizens, and that is, of course, why it is desired to retain them; secondly, they have a most mischievous moral effect in treating the individual as a numbered item in the aggregate that makes up the State. There lie before us two alternative conceptions of the State: it may be thought an organization useful to individuals and essentially their servant, or it may be thought a pagan demigod for whom the individual exists, whose service is his greatest glory and whose supremacy is without limit.
…We have to fear an Anglicized totalitarianism, humane and benevolent but esentially destructive of personal liberty and initiative; and there will be a strong coalition of philanphropists and bureaucrats eager to regulate their fellow-citizens. We must be jealous for our liberties, and to begin with must resist being numbered by convicts in order to facilitate our servitude.
I have nothing to add to that.
Unpersons alerted us to the news that from today British police may legally and against the will of any law-abiding subject, take DNA samples and fingerprints from any arrested person without that person having even been charged with committing a criminal act.
We can but echo the good Unpersons concerns:
The law now leaves British police officers free to help Blunkett establish one of the most ambitious and truly disturbing elements of the British police state that he has slowly but surely been working to create over the last few years. In a country where the state can take over half of your income, charge you expenses when it wrongly imprisons you – yet fail to defend you after it has crushed the right to self-defence, send parents to jail for not sending their children to state day-care centres schools, steal your property because ‘you couldn’t possibly have earned that much money without selling illegal drugs’ whilst slowly handing over control to a foreign power, attempt to dictate what you eat ‘for your own good’ and generally treat its citizens as its troublesome children one has to wonder to what extent we already live in a police state.
This has not been a good week.
John Lettice writes for The Register on the difficulties associated with relying on biometrics.
It will all be very costly, he says, and the pseudo-certainty that it supplies may actually cause mistakes to be made, when the ID checks out but the surrounding facts look dodgy.
If you do not check for duplicates, for example, then the system is not going to tell you that Fred Bloggs of Sollihul is in fact Osama bin Laden. A silly example? Yes and no – obviously, it is not very likely that our current entry systems are going to let someone called Fred Bloggs walk through when they look strangely like Osama bin Laden. However, if he checks out as Fred Bloggs, UK citizen, with no record under our future automated systems, then general appearance is rather less likely to be challenged, or even noticed. So the assumed reliability of the systems could actually increase the security of fugitives in the event of their having successfully obtained clean, genuine ID.
There is much more.
The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) is examining the use of RFID-tagged airline boarding passes that could allow passenger tracking within airports, a proposal some privacy advocates called a potentially “outrageous” violation of civil liberties.
Anthony “Buzz” Cerino, communications security technology lead at the TSA, said the agency believes the use of boarding passes with radio frequency identification (RFID) chips could speed up the movement of passengers who sign on to the agency’s “registered traveler” program. This would permit them to pass through a secure “special lane” during the boarding process.
Under the registered traveler program, frequent fliers would provide the TSA with detailed personal information that would be correlated by a background check. Privacy advocates said they believe the RFID boarding pass would then serve as an automatic link to the registered traveler database. Details about how the system might work haven’t been released by the TSA, and Cerino couldn’t be reached today for further comment.
Cerino didn’t say when or if the TSA would push for introduction of the RFID boarding passes or how such a project – likely to require a massive, networked infrastructure – would be funded.
The TSA has already started to work on deploying RFID boarding passes in Africa under the Federal Aviation Administration’s Safe Skies for Africa Initiative – the initiative identifies Angola, Cameroon, Cape Verde, the Ivory Coast, Kenya, Mali, Namibia, Tanzania and Zimbabwe as member countries.
Katherine Albrecht, founder and director of Consumers Against Supermarket Privacy Invasion and Numbering (CASPIAN), a privacy group that has fought the use of RFID tags by retailers and other organizations, called the idea a potentially “shocking and outrageous” violation of civil liberties.
London Underground is set to roll out high-tech CCTV surveillance software that will automatically alert operators to suspicious behaviour, unattended packages and potential suicide attempts on the capital’s Tube system. The move comes as London remains on a high state of alert against a possible terrorist attack following the bombs in Madrid earlier this month.
LU has been trialling the technology at Liverpool Street station during the past two months and is now evaluating the results with a network-wide rollout tipped to follow across the Tube’s 6,000 CCTV cameras, which cover 95 per cent of stations.
The Intelligent Pedestrian Surveillance system from Ipsotek compares CCTV footage against pictures of the empty station and alerts operators to strange behaviour such as people loitering or bags that have been left on the platform.
Sergio Velastin, director of research and founder of Ipsotek, said that it cuts down on operator time and costs related to blanket monitoring of all CCTV screens by alerting staff only when there is a potential problem. Privacy groups are concerned about the increasing coverage of monitoring technology such as CCTV. Velastin dismissed privacy concerns over IPS and said the software monitors only behavioural patterns and not the individual.
We have tried very consciously to stay away from facial recognition issues. None of our system is capable of recognising an individual – just behaviour. Then the police can come in and say ‘we need to find out who that person is’. It is a balance between being free to do what we wish and being protected.
The Independent reports that ID Cards could be compulsory within less than five years. This is much sooner than the ten year cooling off period originally agreed by Cabinet. Blunkett’s scheme apparently has Tony Blair’s personal support.
A draft Bill will be introduced next month with legislation proper in the November 2005 session (assuming Labour are still in power). The “fast track” Bill will allow compulsion to be introduced without further legislation being necessary, probably by 2008.
The Independent also reports an unnamed Minister repeating Blair’s line that “The argument has moved on from concern about civil liberties”.
It hasn’t.
The civil liberties issues with ID cards are just as strong today as they were fifty years ago. If the Government doesn’t want to talk about them then we must do so, loudly and publicly. We need to make this an election issue.
If we give up our civil liberties then the terrorists will have won.
Cross-posted from The Chestnut Tree Cafe
Blair is a liar. But of course the notion any politician does not utter more than the occasional porkie pie is a very uncontroversial one. But as I said in the wellspring of lies yesterday, one can but marvel at the bare faced effrontery of it when our political masters stand up and state something is true when any person not wilfully blind (or David Blunkett) can see it is patently untrue just by reading a few newspapers or one of several thousand blogs and websites.
Mr Blair said political objections had been removed and the only obstacle now was technical. He made clear he wanted the project to “move forward” as soon as it was feasible.
He risked antagonising civil rights campaigners by claiming they no longer objected to the idea, which would see each citizen required to buy a computer-readable card that would record personal details.
Risks antagonising? Civil rights campaigners no longer object to the idea? Excuse the French, but, what the fuck? Blair is a bare faced liar. The only other alternative to that is that he is so ignorant of goings on outside the cloistered world of 10 Downing Street as to be completely deluded.
I will try my damnedest to refuse to get an ID card and I will openly declare that I do not have one when the sun rises on that evil day. I urge as many people as possible to not just resist but to do so openly when the time comes. They will try to make it very difficult to live without one so we must make the system unworkable by using whatever civil disobedience and intelligent resistance is needed. Do not cooperate with your own repression. Time to get creative, people. Time to get angry.
Cross-posted from Samizdata.net
Telegraph reports that Tony Blair brushed aside Cabinet reservations last night and gave the Home Office the go-ahead to introduce compulsory identity cards following the discovery this week of a suspected British Muslim terrorist network.
Mr Blair said the deal he and David Blunkett, the Home Secretary, negotiated with the rest of the Cabinet no longer applied.
There is no longer a civil liberties objection to that. There is a series of vast logistical questions to be resolved and, in my judgment, logistics is the only time delay, otherwise it needs to move forward.
I am surprised. No longer a civil liberties objection to ID cards? That is a lie, as obvious as they get. Now I want to hear the clamour of protest and we shall do our best to add our voice.
So, ladies and gentlement. There we have it. I sincerely hoped that the day would never come. But it is here and what is it to be done?
For those who have not yet noticed, there is a new blog set up by one of our illustrious contributors, Trevor Mendham – the RFID Scanner. I guess the name is self-explanatory. Please read the suberb summary and arguments about RFID in the sidebar…
At a recent software conference, Sun Microsystems unveiled new software initiatives in areas related to RFID, 3-D interfaces, game technology and Linux. According to the CTO of Sun, the advances are further proof that “innovation [is] Sun’s DNA.” The article reviews Sun’s upcoming product offerings, noting that the company is actively looking to capitalize on hot new technology trends (e.g. a new RFID test center is on tap for May).
Also, Oracle plans to launch new RFID software offerings in an attempt to give retailers such as Wal-Mart the ability to “handle the deluge of data that RFID systems are expected to produce.” According to Oracle executives, “The IT systems most companies use today are not equipped for a world in which billions of objects report their whereabouts in real-time.” In addition to building in RFID data-processing capabilities in its databases and application servers, Oracle will release new device drivers in its software as well as “device driver frameworks.” Other big-name IT vendors, such as IBM and Microsoft, are also actively exploring new RFID technology offerings.
Finally, Delta Air Lines Inc. starts its second test of radio frequency identification (RFID) technology to track bags today in hopes of improving accuracy over the 96.7% to 99.9% it achieved in a test last year. Delta will write information to the RFID bag tags at the request of the Transportation Security Administration, which has backed both tests, Rary said. That information will include the flight number, passenger name and what Rary called a “license plate” – a serial number that identifies each bag.
More on the ICAO story first noted by Trevor. An international aviation group is completing new passport standards this week, setting the groundwork for all passports issued worldwide to include digitized photographs that a computer can read remotely and compare to the face of the traveler or to a database of mug shots.
Supporters hope the system will banish fake passports and help fight terrorism. But critics say the standards will enable a global infrastructure for surveillance and lead to a host of national biometric databases, including ones run by countries with troubling human rights records.
The ICAO has already settled on facial recognition as the standard biometric identifier, though countries may add fingerprints or iris scans if they wish. The standards body will vote on Friday whether to adopt radio-frequency ID chips, such as those used in Fast Pass toll systems, as the standard method of storing and transmitting the digitized information.
Simon Davies, director of human rights group Privacy International, said the ICAO hasn’t consulted with human rights groups and shouldn’t be involved at all.
The most troubling aspect of international standard setting is that it often occurs without any national dialogue through the diplomatic process. Governments merely use the standards bodies as a convenient means of implementing controversial policy.
Privacy International suggested that the ICAO should have adopted a standard that would allow computers at a border to match the traveler to the digital photo on a passport, but that did not permit any government to keep a central database of photos.
The group argued that facial recognition is not the most accurate identification benchmark, and that matching a person to an old photograph is problematic.
|
Commentary
Economics
Politics
Specialist
Tech
|
