By silicon.com, 6 April 2004 18:10
'No!' tends to be the resounding response whenever the question of whether we'll benefit from having compulsory ID cards in the UK is asked.
But is this because the people who feel strongly enough about this issue to comment all tend to be from the anti-ID card lobby, while the apathetic and the pro-lobby tend to sit by in expectant silence of a decision being taken one way or another?
But the effect of the bombast opposition - albeit potentially from outspoken sources - is one of suggesting widespread dislike for the scheme.
The phrase 'Big Brother' is used with reckless abandon and many voice slightly self-important fears about round-the-clock monitoring, often without explaining why they think the government cares about where they are 24 hours per day.
However, others raise far more sensible concerns about the 'all your eggs in one basket' approach of an all-important ID card. If it's stolen, forged or copied what could happen to you? If the roll out is glitch-ridden will people find themselves unjustly locked out of the benefits system?
Others ask whether ID cards will become the next lucrative target for organised crime - creating a new market for forged cards to replace the old one for forged passports, visas and documentation.
There are obviously a great deal of questions surrounding this controversial issue, which is why we want to hear what you think. Please take two minutes to answer our quick survey on compulsory ID cards.
Comments
There are 12 comments. Join the discussion
1. Charles Wood
I have been there when people were stopped in France for ID cards. I have watched people randomly stopped in Cuba to look at ID cards. In the Uk they could not have done this in either case as it would have been "Sus" outlawed here decades ago.
What good has it done apart from give the police fascist powers over everyone, including the everyday inocent and spread a climate of fear and distrust. It certainly has not stopped terrorism in the countries mentioned.
I really do not want my children to grow up with the ethics of world war 2 as background, and a police state.
2. Andrew Beckett
I've heard that the government will make the information held on ID cards available to banks and other commercial organisations. If these commercial organisations are to benefit from the information in reducing fraud and therefore their operating costs, why are we going to have to pay for the cards? Surely the government should be looking to industry to cover the costs if industry is going to benefit?
3. anonymous
We are given cost as a major implecation to the general public, but we have to pay for passports, driving licenses and citizen cards so why not combine into one security card at one cost.
4. Richard Willaims
The really frightening aspect is when they put the info on a chip that is implanted in either your forehead or right hand (Mondex already have the technology) and combine it with your credit card, finally they get rid of cash!
5. Peter Lewis
This can easily have the opposite effect from that intended. This kind of system often lulls people into a false sense of security. Real security comes from using systems which look at a number of parameters and not just one.
If ID cards were as effective as their proponents would have us believe, why is there still credit card fraud, cheque fraud, etc. in France? I live there, and I know that fraud levels aren't, IMHO, sufficiently different to justify the loss of personal freedom.
6. Sumner Morrill Koch
We, will be supposedly free to travel from state to state and Country to country, but this does not worry me at all.I can eliminate my travel after I am 66 years of age,I have lived my life,and also this world sucks, you sometimes begin to realize it earlier in life it costs you dearly to be born to survive and also very expensive to be put back into the earth where we allcame from in the first place, Soil to Soil just recycling dirt!
7. D.W.Griffiths
Question:
When was the last time Government had an involvement in a large, high-tech project that worked as advertised? Also, technology doesn't solve problems - people do. Anyone who supports this techno Maginot-line mentality should try reading a little history before committing to it.
8. Bernice
I was educated (some time ago) at a school run by a couple who had, had to leave Nasi Germany in a bit of a hurry. Thay taught me to always treasure freedom and whatch those who would threaten it. I feel I can guess what there reaction to these proposals would be.
9. anonymous
We have voluntary id cards. They are called passports by most of us. Guess what, those that need to, steal them or forge them. Why does this big brother government think that criminals will find it any more difficult to do this with an id card?
Are they really going to lock up law-abiding citizens for not carrying these? Can't work, won't work.
Blunkett, go back to running the Republic of Sheffield and leave the rest of us alone.
10. Bob Robinson
The government already has all the information about us in various departments. So perhaps a sensible ID card system can reduce some of the duplication of the information. I believe the loss of freedom is insignificant compared to the benefits if set-up properly. There lies the rub, as previously mentioned when did the government last (or ever) complete a major IT related project, that involved the public, without major overuns in time and cost and significant failure to deliver what was envisaged. ID cards could have major benefits in administration, security, health and fraud prevention if properly thought out with an all encompassing view that included commercial as well as government needs. The scheme should not only pay for itself within a few years but should significantly reduce government and commercial costs involving administration.
11. anonymous
Passport, Drivers Licence, National Insurance number. Why do we need yet a fourth method of identification? Since most people voluntarily have a Passport, why cant that be used as an ID card. Are we so desperate to spend more tax monies with the major consultancy practices that we have to have yet another never ending never delivering project?
12. anonymous
In the last 2 years, the government's estimate of the cost of this scheme has risen from £3.1billion to £5.5 billion and they haven't even started yet. Industry experts suggest it is impossible to id someone 100% from just 1 biometric, at least 3 are required. We will be forced to have biometric scans on pain of £2,500 fine for failure to attend scanning appointment. We will be obliged on pain of similar fine to inform the govt. every time we move. The government is now planning a compulsory scheme although it was originally trailed as a voluntary scheme. It will be soon updated to include radio tracking so we can be remotely monitored. It will eventually be linked to an EU wide scheme which will allow police forces in such places as Turkey to access the data. It will not prevent organised crime (Italy has an id card system - has it stopped the Mafia?) It will not stop terrorism (Spain has id cards - did it stop the Madrid bombings?)The criminal gangs behind people trafficing will be able to forge these cards. It won't work properly (run an internet search on the new Air Traffic Control system, the NHS computer system, the CSA/Inland Revenue fiascos if you don't believe me) It will be between 2 and 10 times over-budget (thats anywhere between £11 and £55 billion total)It will be abused by state officials, the Government will probably end up selling the data to all and sundry (as they now do with the 'edited register of electors'). Finally ask yourself this question: Even if I trust this bunch:- Bliar, Blunkett RIP(but no doubt soon to be resurrected like that other member of the 'un-dead' Mandelson) et al, how do I know I can trust the government we will have 5 years from now, 10 years from now, 15 years from now?
Of course you can't know, and that is why you must stop this infernal scheme now by warning your MP that you will not support any party that backs this scheme. To find out who is your local MP visit: http://www.locata.co.uk/commons/
In light of the recent Law Lords ruling on detention of terror subjects, my suggestion is that a much cheaper option would be to keep an electronic tag on that real menace to society - government ministers.
As a final note; according to recent press reports, 5000 people die every year of preventable hospital borne diseases in NHS hospitals - more than died in the 9/11 attacks and the Madrid bombings put together. If the government has between £5.5 and £55 billion to spend on protecting its citizens maybe it could address that problem.