We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
Oh God, he’s back. Last Friday there were the good news in the media that the ID card plans have been put on hold. This morning, SkyNews reported that Big Blunkett is expected to announce a bill to introduce ID cards today. His ‘compromise’ to the bitter opposition in the Cabinet is to make the scheme voluntary to begin with. And there I was thinking it was meant to be voluntary all along.
It is rare to see a more blatant crusade by a public figure in the face of evidence and opposition. Granted, the opposition to ID cards in Britain is not vociferous enough and it is time to turn up the volume. Trevor has set up an iCan campaign agaist identity cards and there are others with similar concerns.
Let’s see what is to be done…
Patrick Crozier of Transport Blog links to this piece from last August at Tollroadnews about the EU banning one kind of road pricing technology, in order to make things easier for its own preferred sort of technology.
Here’s what the EU wants to ban:
No new DSRC systems would be permitted in Europe after 2008, and existing ones would be banned in 2012. This radical anti-DSRC move is an attempt to force adoption of what is seen as a modern technology (GPS) regardless of cost or difficulty by forcing out the existing short range wireless technologies.
And they want to replace it with their own pet satellite based system.
I always want to believe the worst of the EU, and unimpeded by any facts, I do. In this instance, I assume that the technology that the EU is engaged in banning is better from the civil liberties point of view than the technology it favours, and that this is part of why it is banning what it is banning. It doesn’t supply as much in the way of incidental snooping and central surveillance as the kit it wants to use.
Tollroadnews assert that it’s a bodge of the worst sort, because the new kit will work worse than the old kit. But if it could be made to work, would the system the EU wants be more centralised and Big Brotherish, or from this particular point of view is there no great difference? Obviously, comments welcome.
The Times reports that plans for compulsory national identity cards were put on ice yesterday when the Government delayed a decision on a mandatory scheme until “later this decade”.
Although David Blunkett got the go-ahead for a draft Bill proposing a voluntary scheme in this year’s Queen’s Speech, it will only give the Government powers to build a database using information from passports, driving licences and residents’ permits.
The decision is a blow for both the Home Secretary and Tony Blair. The Prime Minister has invested considerable political capital in the project, saying that Britain has to have compulsory ID cards in the future.
However, after weeks of fierce negotiations, mostly at John Prescott’s Domestic Affairs Committee, the opposition of Cabinet heavyweights led by Jack Straw and Gordon Brown proved too difficult to overcome and a fudge was agreed.
In an unusual step, the Cabinet issued a statement after its weekly meeting yesterday. “In principle Cabinet believes that a national ID card scheme can bring major benefits,” it said. “In practice, given the size and complexity of the scheme a number of issues will need to be resolved over the years ahead.”
The Government would proceed “by incremental steps”. First there would be legislation to set up a scheme, “but we will reserve the final decision on a move to compulsion until later this decade”.
Oh great, so we have some time to spread the word. I would not shut down your iCan campaign against identity cards just yet, Trevor. There is also Big Blunkett’s ‘voluntary’ database that should cover 80 per cent of the population, five to six years after the programme gets under way. Also, Mr Big Blunkett does not want to let go of his scheme and insists that it is phased in, with passports and other official documents acting as a first wave of the programme.
It is far from over yet.
Courtesy of COMUSNAVEUR Security Staff, via my sources I received the following warning:
You are advised that hotel room keys that look like a credit card will contain personal information, including:
- Customers (your) name
- Customers partial home address
- Hotel room number
- Check in date and check out date
- Customers (your) credit card number and expiration date.
- In Europe, passport numbers are also frequently recorded onto the cards.
When you turn them in to the front desk your personal information is there for any employee to access by simply scanning the card in the hotel scanner. An employee can take a handfull of cards home and using a readily available scanning device, access the information onto a laptop computer and go shopping at your expense. Simply put, hotels do not erase these cards until an employee issues the card to the next hotel guest. It is usually kept in a drawer at the front desk with YOUR INFORMATION ON IT!
You should always destroy the card. NEVER leave it behind in the room and NEVER turn them in to the front desk when you check out of a room. The hotel will not charge you for the card.
A kind reader sent in a link to the debate on ID cards that took place yesterday in the House of Commons. Judge for yourselves:
Mr. Simon Thomas (Ceredigion): Let me say at the outset that I am opposed to ID cards, both in principle and on grounds of practicality. To put it at its most brutal, I do not believe that the best way of remembering, as we do this week, those who gave their lives for freedom is to introduce the sort of society that would have had Saddam Hussein drooling. The apparatus of totalitarian repression depends on knowing who and where every citizen is and was, and which God they worship. The Government may have dropped the God bit, but the potential for all the rest remains.
…
At the moment, we balance privilege with responsibility. It is a privilege to drive a car, and it is a responsibility to pass a test, hold a driving licence, tax a vehicle and so on. It is a privilege to enter another country, but a passport is needed. Other forms of identity, including credit cards, party membership cards such as my Plaid Cymru card and parliamentary photo passes, are mere conveniences that we can opt to use. An ID card system tips that scale and reduces citizen to cipher. It forgets that the Government should be subject to the people and instead makes the people subject to the Government. The central tenet of freedom—for people to be able to move around as they please, live where they please and do want they want, as long as they do not harm others—is reduced to a nannying, bullying attitude that the Government must know where people are and what they are doing.
…
I would like to tackle the Government’s arguments head on. However, as I said earlier, the Government have not presented a unified argument in their discussion of a national ID card. They have been as convincing as they have been consistent. We were told first that ID cards would deter international terrorism and political violence; next that they would enable the Government to end benefit fraud; and then that they were the panacea that would stop illegal immigration, asylum troubles and illegal working in the UK. The Labour Government, much like the Tory Government in 1995, have used any justification for the introduction of ID cards. It is a clear example of a solution in search of a problem.
Hear, hear, hon. Ladies and Gentlemen. It is worth reading the whole thing.
Tony Blair’s official spokesman has made an announcement about Big Blunkett’s plans to introduce compulsory national Identity Cards for innocent British citizens. The statement is confusing and seems to be an attempt to patch over the splits in Cabinet.
According to the statement, Ministers have agreed in principle that there would be major benefits to such a scheme. However they have also agreed that the practical issues are immense. Of perhaps most interest is this sentence:
We will legislate to enable the scheme to be introduced and plan on the basis that all the practical problems can be overcome but we will reserve the final decision on a move to compulsion until later this decade.
That could be seen as a victory for either side.
So long as this enabling legislation is in place the threat of compulsory National Identity Cards will remain. We must make it clear to the government that proceeding any further down this road will lose them the next election.
Cross-posted from The Chestnut Tree Cafe
The Cabinet domestic affairs sub-committee met yesterday to consider Big Blunkett’s plans to introduce compulsory national Identity Cards for innocent British citizens.
The plan has split the Cabinet with Gordon Brown, Jack Straw and Patricia Hewitt said to be amongst those opposing Blunkett.
According to reports in today’s media, the meeting was “acrimonious”, “savage” and a “bloodbath”.
Incidentally, the BBC have launched a new website iCan for campaigners. If it takes off, it could generate a lot of exposure. I’ve started a campaign against ID cards.
Partially cross-posted from The Chestnut Tree Cafe
Adelaide is swathed with security cameras that observe comings and goings in the Adelaide CBD.
The local police love this and are boasting about how well it is going.
The company in charge of the cameras is well pleased as well, and are so pleased that they are providing live feeds from the cameras on their website. They have had the good grace to omit a privacy policy. After all, that would be a bad joke.
It had to happen:
Undercover Agents Talking To Each Other In ‘Under 12’ Chatroom
WASHINGTON, DC—In an effort to weed out pedophiles, two FBI agents, identified only as “Cutiepie1994” and “KoalaLover,” unknowingly communicated with one another in the under-12 chat room of TweenTalk.com for almost two hours Tuesday. “You should see me in my new bathing suit. It’s really rad,” Cutiepie wrote. “Kewl. Guess what? My parents aren’t home right now,” KoalaLover responded. Two minutes after their lengthy Internet conversation ended, KoalaLover unknowingly passed Cutiepie on the way into the bathroom.
Well, it probably will happen, assuming life imitates Onion.
Statewatch reports that legal opinion says that under the ECHR mandatory data retention is disproportionate, contrary to the rule of law and cannot be said to be necessary in a democratic society
Privacy International (cannot find a link to this on their site) have obtained a Legal Opinion from the international law firm Covington and Burling which presents a devastating critique of plans by EU governments and the Council of the European Union to introduce the mandatory retention of communications data. The Opinion examines in particular the draft EU Framework Decision on communications data retention and access to it leaked by Statewatch in August 2002.
The Opinion concludes that:
The data retention regime envisaged by the (EU) Framework Decision, and now appearing in various forms at the Member State level, is unlawful.
…
The indiscriminate collection of traffic data offends a core principle of the rule of law: that citizens should have notice of the circumstances in which the State may conduct surveillance, so that they can regulate their behaviour to avoid unwanted intrusions. Moreover, the data retention requirement would be so extensive as to be out of all proportion to the law enforcement objectives served. Under the case law of the European Court of Human Rights, such a disproportionate interference in the private lives of individuals cannot be said to be necessary in a democratic society.
White Rose is run by people in London, so they won’t be going, but maybe we have a few readers in Chicago. It’s organised by the Century Foundation, and they also publish this, which all of us can get hold of and read.
The Cabinet is increasingly split over the issue of introducing compulsory national Identity Cards for innocent British citizens. Despite this the Sunday Times reports that the Queen’s Speech is likely to contain reference to them in the form of a draft Bill.
The Sunday Times suggests that this is just a “fig leaf” to cover Big Blunkett‘s embarrassment and that ID Cards will not actually be introduced before the next general election if at all.
They might be right, but that’s not a risk we can afford to take. We need to redouble our efforts to oppose this dangerous idea.
Cross-posted from The Chestnut Tree Cafe – now with mailing list
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
