<?php

/*

* fpArchive.php:

* archives of the front-page

*

* Copyright (c) 2009 No2ID. All rights reserved.

* Email: <webmaster@no2id.net> Web: <https://www.no2id.net>

*

* $Id: fpArchive.php,v 1.83 2011/06/12 15:29:36 adam Exp $

*

*/

?>

<?php

$page_title = 'front page archive';

require_once('inc/pageHead.php');

require_once('inc/obscureemail.php');

?>

<div style="width:100%;float:left;clear:both;">

<h1>NO2ID Front Page Archive</h1>

<p>Here's a selection of our previous front page articles:</p>

<h1 style="clear:none"><a name="2011-02-20-census-senseless"></a>10

Census Lies</h1>

<h5>From: 2011-02-20 // To: 2011-06-12</h5>

<p>The propaganda push for the 2011 census has begun. NO2ID opposes

this census because it represents the worst features of database

state, the insatiable desire for ever more information, and the

presumption that official purposes override privacy. <br />Here are

the ten worst lies you will be told in the coming weeks:</p>

<h4>1. The Census is essential for government and business

planning</h4>

<p>On the contrary, it is worse than useless because it is expensive,

inaccurate, and quickly out of date.</p>

<h4>2. Our Census data is trusted and respected worldwide</h4>

<p>Even were this true, should we care? Most countries do have some

sort of census, but would being respected at doing something

essentially useless be worth more than £300millions.</p>

<h4>3. It's a great source for genealogy</h4>

<p>100 or 200 years ago there was little record of most people's

lives, and old censuses may be the only documents available. It is

ludicrous to assume the same will apply in 100 years time, and

outrageous to suggest it justifies spending public money.</p>

<h4>4. It's 'good for employment', it provides jobs.</h4>

<p>Temporary ones, Yet the money spent would otherwise be spent on

something &#8212; probably something useful involving permanent

jobs.</p>

<h4>5. Census data is confidential for 100 years.</h4>

<p>Not any more. Census forms are kept from the public for 100 years.

But EU legislation allows the 2011 census to be shared with all 27

member states, and the Statistics and Registration Service Act 2007

created powers to share the information with public bodies, and

<em>"approved researchers"</em>.</p>

<h4>6. The census results in high-quality information.</h4>

<p>No one knows how many people lie in their return. The 2001 census

is generally believed to have 'missed' around 900,000 men under

40.</p>

<h4>7. Everyone should be proud of playing their part in the

census.</h4>

<p>There is no reason to be proud of being tallied like cattle. There

is every reason to oppose the waste and the intrusion. There is a long

history of public resentment of the census.<br />In the 1800s census

officers had to be given police protection; in 1911 the suffragettes

boycotted it in protest; and in the 50s TV publicity told people it

wasn't "another bit of snooping"</p>

<h4>8. Communities can use census statistics to help gain

recognition.</h4>

<p>Whether a group is <em>"officially recognised"</em> is a political

decision, not the same as individuals being located and categorised.

390,127 people recorded their religion as Jedi in 2001; they have yet

to be officially recognised. More seriously, the Board of Deputies

says the census underestimates British Jews, precisely because some of

that community are nervous of officials knowing where they live.</p>

<h4>9. Completing the census is straightforward, convenient and

secure.</h4>

<p>New questions are more intrusive than ever before, requiring

details of employer's addresses, the details of any visitors to your

house, and where they usually live. This is a direct danger to people

who have sensitive occupations. The online version is a perfect cover

for phishing attacks.</p>

<h4>10. Your personal information is protected</h4>

<p>Security is only as good as the shortest route to breaking it.

Thousands of people will be involved, large commercial contractors and

government agencies will process it, and the law newly provides that

the data may be accessed for a variety of reasons, not just for making

a statistical summary.<br />It cannot be guaranteed there won't be a

security breach, or that data once captured will be used

legitimately.</p>

<p>They cannot protect it; they shouldn't collect it.</p>

<h1 style="clear:none"><a name="newchief"></a>New chief for NO2ID</h1>

<h5>From: 2011-02-05 // To: 2011-02-20</h5>

<table class="change">

<tr>

<td class="change"><img src="/img/booth.jpg" alt="Phil Booth" /></td>

<td class="change"><img src="/img/herbert.jpg" alt="Guy Herbert, NO2ID's National Coordinator and Chief Executive" /></td>

</tr>

<tr >

<td class="change">Retiring: Phil Booth</td>

<td class="change">Replacement: Guy Herbert</td>

</tr>

</table>

<p>

After 6 years as National Coordinator of NO2ID, its chief executive, Phil Booth

has resigned for personal reasons. The NO2ID Advisory Board met on Monday,

31st January and appointed Guy Herbert, who has been volunteering for the

campaign since 2004, as his successor.

<br />

</p>

<p>

Guy Herbert says:

</p>

<blockquote>

<p>No one should underestimate the debt the whole country owes to Phil

Booth. His incredible energy and hard work has been one of the key factors

in making NO2ID the fastest growing and most successful pressure group in

modern British history, and allowing us to kill the Home Office's ID

scheme. Our task now is to use that invaluable legacy and experience, and

take the fight to the surveillance state.

<br />

<br />

Everybody needs privacy, but not everybody realises how much they do &#8212; or

how much it is threatened. NO2ID will now focus on those government

initiatives that affect very large numbers of people, and that illustrate

the key point about the stalker-state's unnecessary obsession with knowing

its citizens intimately: the ID culture, vetting in everyday life,

databases tracking drivers and air passengers, and the continuing battles

for medical privacy. The first item on the menu is the most obtrusive and

pervasive piece of official nosiness of all &#8212; which the present government

actually admits is unnecessary, but is doing anyway &#8212; census."</p>

</blockquote>

<br />

<h1 style="clear:none"><a name="idcardcon"></a>BROKEN PROMISES, BROKEN SYSTEM</h1>

<p>In 2006 NO2ID began campaigning on medical confidentiality, alongside the <a href="http://www.nhsconfidentiality.org">NHS Confidentiality campaign</a>. The main target up to now has been the Summary Care Record (SCR).</p>

<p>An early success was securing patients the right to opt out. But Connecting for Health - the agency responsible for upgrading NHS IT - has been pouring money into a system that <a href="https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/news-articles/1006/10061703">researchers at UCL</a> have shown brings little (if any) benefit, and in which 10% of records already risk patient safety.</p>

<p>It has been remorseless and tricky in driving onward its dangerous flagship programme:</p>

<ul>

<li>Misleading patients and manufacturing 'consent';</li>

<li>Bypassing GPs ~V with the decision to upload presented as between <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NHS_primary_care_trust">PCTs</a> and Practice Managers;</li>

<li>Misrepresenting who has access to records and how;</li>

<li>Mailing propaganda to tens of millions in the run-up to an election.</li>

</ul>

<p>The Tories and LibDems both promised in opposition to tackle the SCR. The Coalition agreement promises to put patients "[in] control of their health records". So what <strong>has</strong> happened?</p>

<ul>

<li>Buried written announcement in Parliament that uploads may continue;</li>

<li>Uploads accelerate. Massively.</li>

<li>Health minister delays a critical vote by GPs by offering a review that was already happening;</li>

<li>Ministers skate over the <a href="https://www.ucl.ac.uk/news/news-articles/1006/10061703">independent study</a> that highlights "wicked risks".</li>

</ul>

<p>And when the GP's Committee of the British Medical

Association called for uploads to stop and for access to the

system to be switched off... ministers <em>did nothing</em>.

GPs are being forced to work the system individually to keep

privacy for their patients.</p>

<p>Over 2 million people's details are exposed NOW on a system

that threatens their privacy, and, for some, their health. It

won't end here.</p>

<h1 style="clear:none"><a name="idcardcon"></a>THE TASK AHEAD</h1>

<p>After six hard years of campaigning, we can celebrate a little. The new government in its <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8677933.stm">coalition agreement</a> has adopted some of NO2ID's most important aims as its own. It promises that it will:</p>

<ul>

<li>"Scrap... the ID card scheme, the National Identity Register, the next generation of biometric passports and the ContactPoint database.</li>

<li>Outlaw... the finger-printing of children at school without parental permission.</li>

<li>Adopt... the protections of the Scottish model for the DNA database.</li>

<li>End... storage of internet and email records without good reason."</li>

</ul>

<p>That is a good start. Setting a government's agenda could not have been achieved without the thousands of people who have each fought to change the hearts and minds of their friends, family and colleagues, local and national media, politicians, parties and government; the many who have given generously in money to allow us to run an office, send mailings, and produce briefings and leaflets; and our dedicated volunteers and staff.</p>

<p>However we cannot afford to be complacent: NO2ID's work is far from done.</p>

<p>The database state is already too much assumed as an administrative goal for it to be killed by the loss of the <a href="/IDSchemes/whyNot">ID scheme</a>. Even during the election, despite the skepticism of parties now in government, 'Connecting for Health' was pushing forward with its <a href="http://www.facebook.com/pages/Protect-Your-Medical-Confidentiality-ACT-NOW/330345503401?v=wall#!/pages/Protect-Your-Medical-Confidentiality-ACT-NOW/330345503401?v=wall">plan to control <strong>all</strong> medical records in England</a>.</p>

<p>Whitehall will not give up these empires without a fight. And the agendas that have been prepared for years may be expected to reappear under new names. The official obsession with identity and information-sharing remains, as does the idea that "personal information is the lifeblood of government".</p>

<p>Holding the new government to its promise is the first thing. Rolling back the database state will involve more battles. But we have proved that - working together - the war CAN be won.</p>

<p>'Stop the database state' means continuing to tackle existing threats to privacy, but it also means changing the culture of <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2010/may/14/identity-cards-passport-checks">showing "ID" at every turn</a>, embedding proper protections in law, in institutions and technology, and achieving real control for you over your personal information. Please help us do that.</p>

<br />

<h1 style="clear:none"><a name="idcardcon"></a>NO2ID, BY A LANDSLIDE</h1>

<p>By midday on 7th May 2010, as we write this, who will form the next government of the UK is unclear, but the popular mandate on ID cards is unanswerable. Of 622 seats declared, 370 have MPs who stood on a manifesto commitment to scrap the ID scheme. The popular vote is even more decisive: those parties opposed to the scheme took 19.1 million votes in those seats where we know the results.  That is 70% of the poll. [source: BBC]</p>

<p>All that is without counting those on the Labour benches whom we know to be skeptical of or outright opposed to the assault on liberty and privacy presented by the <a href="/IDSchemes/whyNot"><strong>National Identity Register</strong></a>.</p>

<p>This Parliament has been elected with a mandate to repeal the Identity Cards Act 2006. Implicit in that is a promise not to let any alternative scheme grow up. MPs must also block any Home Office attempt to use 'passport modernisation' to create a de facto national database.</p>

<p>Whatever you voted, <a href="/getInvolved/join"><strong>please help NO2ID ensure that this mandate is respected</strong></a>.</p>

<p>UPDATE, 8th MAY 2010: With just one seat left to declare, 384 constituencies across the UK are now represented by MPs who stood on a manifesto commitment to scrap ID cards. Parties opposed to the ID scheme took almost 20.7 million votes, or 69.7% of the poll. [source: <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/election2010/results/">BBC</a>]</p>

<br />

<h1 style="clear:none"><a name="idcardcon"></a>ID CARDS: AN ELECTION ISSUE</h1>

<p>As of 26th April, opposition parties' 2010 manifesto commitments on the National Identity Scheme stand as follows:</p>

<ul>

<li>The Conservatives (standing 631 candidates) will "scrap ID cards, the National Identity Register and the ContactPoint database";</li>

<li>The Liberal Democrats (631 candidates) will "scrap intrusive Identity Cards and have more police instead". They also intend to "scrap plans for expensive, unnecessary new passports with additional biometric data";</li>

<li>The UK Independence Party (543 candidates) will "abolish ID cards" which involve "harvesting large amounts of highly sensitive personal data" and are "an ingredient in an increasingly intrusive surveillance society";</li>

<li>The Green Party (315 candidates) oppose ID cards and "also have grave concerns over the development of a national dataset, including detailed biometric data, which has potential for the infringement of civil liberties"; </li>

<li>The British National Party (270 candidates) will "halt all moves to introduce ID cards as an undesirable manifestation of the surveillance society";</li>

<li>The Scottish National Party (59 candidates) would "cut the projects that the country doesn't need and can no longer afford such as Trident, ID cards and deep storage nuclear dumps";</li>

<li>Plaid Cymru (40 candidates) will "continue to oppose legislation to make possible secret inquests, Internet monitoring, wasteful ID cards, the national DNA identity register and longer pre-charge periods of detention for suspects";</li>

<li>The Scottish Green Party (20 candidates) will not have ID cards which "are an unnecessary invasion of our privacy and will do nothing to prevent crime and terrorism"; </li>

<li>The Social Democratic and Labour Party (18 candidates) will "continue to point to the savings possible by scrapping spending catastrophes of the current government such as the £5bn ID cards";</li>

<li>The Democratic Unionist Party (16 candidates) says "plans to introduce ID cards should be scrapped";</li>

<li>The Pirate Party (10 candidates) "strongly oppose compulsory ID cards, and pledge that we will never introduce them";</li>

<li>The Respect Party (11 candidates) succinctly states: "No ID cards";</li>

<li>The Alliance for Green Socialism (6 candidates) will "scrap ID cards and databases of personal information";</li>

<li>The Communist Party of Great Britain (6 candidates) calls for "an end to prolonged detention without charge, house arrest and plans for ID cards and full restoration of the rights of assembly, protest and free speech";</li>

<li>The Liberal Party (5 candidates) "oppose the introduction of ID Cards and the 'Database' State";</li>

<li>The Libertarian Party (4 candidates) will "immediately scrap the compulsory National ID card scheme"</li>

</ul>

<p>From 2012 under a Labour administration, everyone needing a passport will be forced to enrol on a centralised ID database and be fingerprinted - and have to pay for the privilege of having their identity 'managed' by the state for the rest of their life. Labour's manifesto pledge that "in the next Parliament ID cards and the ID scheme will be self-financing" is nonsense. The billions the scheme will cost have to come from somewhere, and it is the public who will pay.</p>

<p>Dr Edgar A. Whitley and Dr Gus Hosein from the LSE Identity Project have published a very helpful analysis, clarifying the main issues and where the main parties stand on them here:</p>

<p><a href="http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/election/?p=1244"><strong>Identity cards, identity databases, biometric passports and compulsion: Some clarifications</strong></a></p>

<br />

<h1 style="clear:none"><a name="idcardcon"></a>THE DATABASE ELECTION</h1>

<p>The general election will be over in a month. But the

struggle over ID cards has already lasted more than one

parliament. The database state has built up huge momentum.

Stopping it will require MPs of all parties to pay attention

now &#8212; and take action for the long-term.</p>

<p>The opposition parties have promised to scrap the ID scheme

and ContactPoint, and to review other databases. But Whitehall

won't want to lose its empires whoever is elected. Whoever is

elected needs to know how much it matters, and have the

determination to follow-through.</p>

<p>Please contact your candidates and party canvassers. What

will they do about&#8230;?</p>

<ul>

<li>National Identity Scheme ("ID cards"). Despite recruiting

just a few thousand guinea-pigs so far, the Home Office still

intends that <strong>everyone</strong> will be fingerprinted

and indexed on a central database &#8212; whether or not that

involves a token card. The start date has slipped back from

2008 to 2012, but the plan still is for you to pass control of

your identity to the state when you apply for a passport.</li>

<br />

<li>Medical records. The Department of Health has engineered a

massive mailshot to patients during the election. You may have

received a letter. It might have gone missing. But fail to

respond and your GP's records on your family may be

irreversably locked into a central database, retrievable

without your consent from that point on.

<a href="http://www.thebigoptout.org/optoutletter"><strong>Opt

out now</strong></a>.</li>

<br />

<li>ContactPoint. An index of every child in England and Wales

has gone live despite technical faults and security concerns.

Putting everyone on the system doesn't make any child safer.

The existence of a "shielding" scheme denied to most families

suggests the reverse.</li>

<br />

<li>DNA and criminal records. A million (and counting)

innocent people are already on the largest DNA database in the

world. When will they be taken off? The Criminal Records

Bureau may treat you as a convicted criminal if you have been

arrested. The Independent Safeguarding Authority can ban you

from your career for accusations, or even for its own idea of

'risk factors' in your legal behaviour.</li>

<br />

<li>Data surveillance and trafficking. Many government bodies

collecting more personal information about you, holding it for

longer &#8212; and passing it around: when and where you travel;

your finances; who you contact by phone or e-mail; what you

read or watch online.</li>

</ul>

<p>Mass surveillance, whether of road journeys (ANPR), overseas

travel (e-Borders), in communications (data retention) or through

any of the many national databases is profoundly different from

the selective surveillance for a purpose that has always been part

of law enforcement. It means the death of privacy. It means a

future official looking over your shoulder while you live your

life now.</p>

<p>When you talk to candidates, please be sure they know that you

care &#8212; and that they should care too. We cannot take privacy or

personal control of personal information for granted. Unless MPs

fight for them in the next parliament, our way of life could

change forever.</p>

<br />

<h1 style="clear:none"><a name="idcardcon"></a>GOVERNMENT RETREATS ARE MISREPORTED</h1>

<p>Despite talk of cuts, u-turns and cancellations, Whitehall is actually speeding up the database state. If you hear this or that scheme has been dropped, then take a closer look. It almost certainly hasn't. There are cosmetic changes but the schemes just keep moving forward.</p>

<ul>

<li>ID Cards. Having found just a handful of <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/libertycentral/2009/nov/30/id-cards-manchester-database-state">'volunteers' in Greater Manchester</a> ID offices are to appear across the North West from January 2010. The ID Card Con is a proof-of-age card or substitute passport... which comes with life-long obligations to keep up a neatly numbered file on yourself.</li>

<br />

<li>Medical Records. The database has *not* been abandoned. The Department of Health is bribing health authorities to do a massive mailshot to patients. Fail to respond to a single letter and your personal details will be permanently uploaded to the NHS spine. <a href="http://www.thebigoptout.org/optoutletter"><strong>Opt out now</strong></a>.</li>

<br />

<li>DNA and criminal records. Much 'consultation'. No change in practice. Almost everyone on the DNA database a year ago still is. The Criminal Records Bureau, too, treats mere arrest rather like conviction. The new Independent Safeguarding Authority can ban anyone from working in caring positions on the basis of hearsay, accusation, or its own peculiar evaluation of 'risk factors'. It will now *only* affect about 11 million people directly. That is 11 million more than necessary. And 11 million more than last year.</li>

<br />

<li>Voter registration. Newly announced: to vote you will have to provide your signature and National Insurance Number for a central database. It cannot affect electoral fraud via postal votes (to blame for most fraud) or polling stations. What it can do is create another readily-searched and cross-referenced official list that you must be on.</li>

</ul>

<p>Scheme after scheme reinforces the message of the database state: "You cannot be trusted; you may not trust others. You MUST trust the state".</p>

<p>If you want the choice of who to trust, <a href="/getInvolved/join"><strong>join NO2ID</strong></a>.</p>

<br />

<h1 style="clear:none"><a name="idcardcon"></a>DON'T GET FOOLED AGAIN</h1>

<p><a href="/idcardcon/"><img src="/images/b/IDcardcon01.gif"

width="125" height="125" alt="Stop the ID Card Con" title="Stop the ID

Card Con" style="float:left; margin:0 5px 5px 0;" /></a>Reports of the the death of the ID scheme are unfortunately premature.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/sep/29/id-cards-gordon-brown-speech">Gordon

Brown's announcement to Labour Conference</a> that "in the

next Parliament there will be no compulsory ID cards for

British citizens" is the same misleading line that ministers

have been using for years &#8212; whatever he says about the

card, the ID scheme has been designed to force people to

'volunteer' for a system they cannot leave. For all his

crowd-pleasing words, you will <em>still</em> be forced to

register when you apply for a passport or, in time, any

officially-designated document.</p>

<p>Mr Brown's statement, "We will reduce the information British

citizens have to give for the new biometric passport to no more than

that required for today's passport" cannot be true even if taken

literally, since biometric passports must have at least the biometrics

(i.e. compulsory fingerprinting) in addition to the information

already on existing ones.</p>

<p>The Identity and Passport Service programme to build linked

databases &#8211; the National Identity Register &#8211; that will be

shared between the passport and identity schemes, and integrated with

the DWP's systems has not been scrapped. And a raft of regulations

defining the information to be held and the masses more information

involved in the application process were passed earlier this summer.

If what Mr Brown says were true, these would be repealed

forthwith.</p>

<p>The ID scheme and database state steamroller on, and we cannot

afford to let up the pressure.</p>

<p>If you want proof, all you need do is pay attention to Manchester.

IPS has not withdrawn its propaganda campaign and is still looking for

guinea-pigs. NO2ID's first Stop the ID Card Con campaign events are on

10th October, and it's more important than ever that we counter the

government's spin. <a href="/idcardcon/"><strong>Please help us spread

the word on the streets of the North West and across the

country</strong></a>.</p>

<p>The ID scheme is not dead.</p>

<br />

<h1 style="clear:none"><a name="idcardcon"></a>HOME OFFICE STEPS ON THE GAS</h1>

<p><a href="/idcardcon/"><img src="/images/b/IDcardcon01.gif"

width="125" height="125" alt="Stop the ID Card Con" title="Stop the ID

Card Con" style="float:left; margin:0 5px 5px 0;" /></a>Only 8 months

to go before a new government might want to cancel the ID scheme, and

the Home Office has turned to desperate measures to convince everyone

that it is inevitable&#8230;. Or maybe it is just trying to buy so many

bits of the database that the next Home Secretary can be bamboozled

into keeping some of them.</p>

<p>A few thousand people have "registered an interest" in an ID card

on the government's website. It is hard to believe many of them will

actually apply when they discover

<a href="http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2009/draft/ukdsi_9780111480427_en_2#sch1">how

burdensome it is</a>.</p>

<p>But never mind that cards will be vanishingly rare items until

the Identity and Passport Service has figured out how to

<a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article3261968.ece">force</a>

people to apply, the IPS has embarked on a vast propaganda

exercise aimed at employers and retailers. In push-polls and

private seminars there are hints that they might find ID cards

useful in managing their employees &#8212; which would be illegal.

Expensive PR and advertising campaigns aimed at shops and pubs

suggest that they are about to replace cheap, simple,

privacy-friendly proof of age schemes such as

<a href="http://www.citizencard.com/">CitizenCard</a> &#8212; which

is <em>just ridiculous</em>.</p>

<p>Meanwhile, on a parallel track, another Home Office agency, the UK

Borders Agency, is triumphantly introducing fingerprinting in Post

Offices for its closely-related biometric visa system. (They are

supposed to share the same database.) We hope the public finds this as

repulsive an idea as we do. It will certainly lengthen the queues.</p>

<p>So ID cards are back in the news. But just in case anyone in the

IPS's 'beacon' city of Manchester hasn't heard anything about the

scheme but the slippery propaganda from the government, NO2ID is

focussing there too. Our <a href="/idcardcon/">Stop the ID Card

Con</a> campaign will run on the streets of the North West from

October 2009, urging people "Don't be a Guinea Pig".</p>

<p>Please give it your support, and help see off this wasteful and

oppressive Whitehall obsession once and for all.</p>

<br />

<h1 style="clear:none"><a name="db_state"></a>GOOD NEWS, BAD NEWS</h1>

<p><a href="/images/"><img src="/images/cartoons/NO2ID_Johnson_thumb.jpg"

width="250" height="178" alt="Click to see full size" title="Click to see full

size" style="float:left; margin:0 5px 5px 0;" /></a>Alan Johnson's recent announcement that ID cards will be 'voluntary'

<a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/07/03/johnson_id_cards_uncompulsory/">is

not in fact any change of policy at all</a>.</p>

<p>The good news is that the scheme is really getting ever further behind, with

even the implementation of "ID cards for foreigners" slow if you compare

official figures with the original targets. (Mr Johnson says it is on-schedule

and to be speeded up.)</p>

<p>The bad news is that the legislation has not changed, nor has the intention.

The plan is as it was. From some time in 2011 an application for a passport

will mean you must also apply for registration on the National Identity

Register &#8212; the ID database. You will be said to have 'volunteered'.

Once on the Register you <em>will</em> be required to be fingerprinted at

your own expense and report yourself to the authorities for life. The card

is a red herring. It is the database that matters.</p>

<p>The good news is all opposition parties are now committed to abolishing the

Register, if they gain power.</p>

<p>The bad news is that the Identity and Passport Service intends to build a

Register anyway, pretending that the components are necessary for changes to

passports. And regulations setting out the details of the scheme have been

hustled through the House of Commons, despite only a handful of fanatics

being prepared to speak in their favour. And the Register is still planned

to form the centre-piece of a revolution in government according to the

<a href="http://www.ips.gov.uk/cps/files/ips/live/assets/documents/13439_Safeguarding_Identity_w_opt.pdf">Safeguarding

Identity</a> (pdf) strategy.</p>

<p>The good news is that so far only 3,500 people in total have registered with

the Home Office their interest in having an ID card. We intend to tell them the

bad news about life-long compulsory registration, and see how many still want

to complete their application.</p>

<p>And the final good news is that faced with a real conflict over the scheme

airport workers and pilots threatening industrial action if they were forced

onto the Register this autumn the Government has backed down. If they cannot

avoid a fight they will lose it. IF we keep up the pressure, IF we hold the

opposition to their promises, the ID scheme will collapse and be swept

away.</p>

<p>NO2ID needs your help to do it, but this is a battle that can be won. Tell

your friends, tell your family. <a href="/join"><strong>Join us</strong></a>.

</p>

<h1 style="clear:none"><a name="db_state"></a>PROPAGANDA BY DEED</h1>

<p>The Home Office is in a whirl of activity on the database state. But it isn't actually doing anything. If you look carefully you can see that it is scrambling to secure its position, covered by a lot of noise about "change".</p>

<p>On ID cards - the announcement of 'trials' in Manchester is less than it seems. There is not yet a scheme nor even a specification. Retail chains who might take fingerprints are "in talks" with government, but it would be commercial madness for them to buy equipment for an undersigned scheme that might be cancelled in a year. Those who pre-register for the scheme are only serving to provide a number that some future Home Office minister can claim shows "the public want ID cards". The razzamatazz around their 'opportunity' is neatly timed to distract attention from the latest cost reports. No real change. But no change of direction either.</p>

<p>On the collection of communications data - though headlines have been grabbed by "cancelling" a super-database containing details of all telephone calls, texts, emails and web-browsing, the collection and searching of the information is still intended. And the information will still be accessible to dozens of organisations without a warrant. No change.</p>

<p>On the DNA database in England and Wales, you will have read stories such as "Police to destroy DNA profiles of 800,000 innocent" (<a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/may/03/police-dna-database-jacqui-smith">Guardian</a>). Only they won't. Not immediately. Let alone comply with the spirit of the law, or match the actual law in Scotland. The Home Office is merely consulting on a proposal that, at some indefinite point in the future it might (a) massively add to the database by sampling all convicts however long ago their convictions, and (b) remove the DNA profiles of those who are not convicted between 6 and 12 years after they are arrested &#8211; the period depending on what they are innocent of. On that basis the database will continue to grow very fast for years to come. No change.</p>

<p>Rest assured NO2ID will continue to fight the database state. No change.</p>

<br />

<h1 style="clear:none"><a name="db_state"></a>NOT DEAD &#8211; NOT EVEN SLEEPING</h1>

<p><a href="/images/"><img src="/images/cartoons/NO2ID_shadow_thumb.jpg"

width="250" height="178" alt="Click to see full size" title="Click to see full

size" style="float:left; margin:0 5px 5px 0;" /></a> Reading news reports you

might think there had been a 'government climbdown', and that our liberties and

privacy are now safer than they were. Not a bit of it.</p>

<p>When she says the government won't be building a single super-database

"because of privacy", Jacqui Smith is lying. She has never worried about your

privacy before, and the actual policy remains the same. Not one step back in

mass surveillance, but a surge forward.</p>

<p>Behind the carefully set-up headline there is a simple announcement: the

government <em>does</em> intend more comprehensive monitoring than any

police state in history &#8212; who you call, for how long, what you read

online, who all your friends are, who you emailed, when, and where you were

when you did so &#8212; all without a warrant.</p>

<p>David Blunkett is spinning too. The headlines say

<a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8022791.stm">"Blunkett seeks

'end to ID cards'"</a> but what he has actually called for is a re-packaging

to fabricate public trust.

<a href="https://www.no2id.net/news/pressRelease/release?name=Blunketts_fake">He

has done so before</a>. Mr Blunkett still believes that you should be

officially numbered, and <strong>

<a href="https://www.no2id.net/IDSchemes/whyNot">your identity determined in a

central register</a></strong>. The physical token you to carry is

irrelevant.</p>

<p>Likewise the Identity and Passport Service. They have not given up. They

have been busy restructuring the identity scheme so that

<a href="http://www.computerweekly.com/blogs/tony_collins/2009/04/heading-for-the-200-passport-t-1.html">core

elements cannot be separated from passports</a>. Mr Blunkett's plan and that

of the current builders is remarkably similar. The machine is defending

itself with all the cunning of well-paid executives protecting their

managerial empires.</p>

<p>Making up a new public face for them <em>does not</em> change these projects

or the culture behind them. That it can be tried just underlines the fraud at

the heart of the database state.</p>

<p><strong><a href="/getInvolved/join">Join NO2ID</a></strong> and

fight for a real change.</p>

<br />

<h1 style="clear:none"><a name="db_state"></a>STOP THE DATABASE STATE</h1>

<p>Commissioned from the Foundation for Information Policy Research, the

<strong><a href="http://www.jrrt.org.uk/uploads/database-state.pdf">Joseph

Rowntree Reform Trust's report, 'Database State'</a></strong> [879KB PDF],

gives a vivid impression of the problem. It shows just how vast the database

state has grown, in effect, while almost no-one was looking.</p>

<p>The report surveys 46 government schemes and databases, and identifies major

threats to the privacy, personal security and freedom of everyone in the UK. It

concludes that more than 8 out of 10 of the systems should either be scrapped

completely or stopped and reconstructed with privacy in mind.</p>

<p>Even so it is not a completely comprehensive list. For some others see <a

href="/dbstate">https://www.no2id.net/dbstate</a> &#8212; and for more detail

on the grand plans of 'joined-up government' see <a

href="/datasharing">https://www.no2id.net/datasharing</a>.</p>

<p>When we coined our slogan "stop the database state" back in 2004 it was

because we needed to give a name to 'the tendency to try to control society by

collecting information on people in databases'.</p>

<p>Five years on, the phrase is on everyone's lips.</p>

<br />

<h1 style="clear:none"><a name="152"></a>THE END OF THE BEGINNING</h1>

<p>The government has been forced to remove <a

href="/IDSchemes/2009-01-22-coroners-and-justice-bill-briefing.pdf">Clause

152</a> [148KB PDF] from the Coroners and Justice Bill. NO2ID had reports of

some MPs receiving over 150 personal letters from constituents in just a few

weeks. It became the most briefed-against part of a Bill that is rag-bag of

controversial measures. This is a significant victory, not least because it

shows how &#8212; working together &#8212; we <strong>can</strong> have an

effect.</p>

<p>Thank you to everyone who acted, and everyone who told others.</p>

<p>But the war is not won. The government has not given up. It intends to build

up the means for information trafficking by the database state, and is now

preparing to manufacture the appearance of public consent via yet another

"consultation" process.</p>

<p>There will be more battles, and &#812; as people everywhere start to wake up to

the meaning of the database state &#8212; next time, <strong><a

href="/getInvolved/join">with your help</a></strong>, we shall be

stronger.</p>

<br />

<h1 style="clear:none"><a name="stalker_state"></a>NO2ID AT THE CONVENTION ON MODERN LIBERTY</h1>

<p>NO2ID has been one of the leading organisations in creating the Convention on Modern Liberty event.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.modernliberty.net/"><img src="http://www.modernliberty.net/wp-content/themes/cml-wp/images/ads/button_b180x180.gif" width="180" height="180" alt="Convention on Modern Liberty - February 28th, London and around Britain" border="0" style="float:left; margin:0 5px 5px 0;" /></a>Working with Amnesty International NI, the UN Association of Wales and other partners, NO2ID has organised live-linked satellite Conventions in Glasgow, Belfast, Cardiff, Manchester, Birmingham, Bristol and Cambridge. We also provided the stewards at the central London event and organise or contribute to several sessions - including the database state panel.</p>

<p>NO2ID's call to action for the Convention on Modern Liberty - to the dozens of other organisations, over 150 speakers, more than 2500 convention-goers at eight locations around the UK, and thousands more watching via the web, is - Get involved!</p>

<p>NO2ID has been fighting against the <a href="/dbstate.php"><strong>database state</strong></a> since we started in 2004, when it was scarcely known or discussed. Our supporters and local groups across the UK inform and engage the public and the media, and keep the pressure up on elected representatives at every level of government. We are having an effect.</p>

<p><a href="/getInvolved/join.php"><strong>Please join us</strong></a>. <a href="/datasharing.php">The battle is far from won</a>.</p>

<p>NO2ID's pledge *to you* from the Convention is that we will advise and assist any group of three or more people who want to set up a local group to bring the fight to people in their area.</p>

<p>You can find our existing local groups <a href="/localGroups/index.php"><strong>here</strong></a> - new volunteers are always very welcome. And please get in touch with Matty on <a href="mailto:local.groups@no2id.net">local.groups@no2id.net</a> if you would like to set up a group in your area. We may be able to connect you with others who are interested, too.</p>

<br />

<h1 style="clear:none"><a name="stalker_state"></a>A CONCEALED ASSAULT ON PRIVACY</h1>

<p><a href="/datasharing.php"><strong>NO2ID has been warning since at least

2006/7</strong></a> about the stated intentions of government "to overcome

current barriers to information sharing within the public sector". Now the

Ministry of Justice has launched an extraordinary coup. It wants to convert the

Data Protection Act into its exact opposite, into a means for

<strong><em>any</em></strong> government department to obtain and use

<strong><em>any</em></strong> information however it likes.</p> <p>Hidden in

the new <a

href="http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2008-09/coronersandjustice.html"><strong>Coroners

and Justice Bill</strong></a> is one clause (cl.152) amending the Data

Protection Act. It would allow ministers to make 'Information Sharing Orders',

that can alter any Act of Parliament and cancel all rules of confidentiality in

order to use information obtained for one purpose to be used for another.</p>

<p>This single clause is as grave a threat to privacy as the entire ID Scheme.

Combine it with the index to your life formed by the planned <a

href="http://www.ips.gov.uk/identity/scheme-what-run.asp#nir">National Identity

Register</a> and everything recorded about you anywhere could be accessible to

any official body.</p> <p>That is what we meant by "the database state". It is

now a threat not a theory.</p> <p>If you have any concerns about what the

government is doing with your personal information - <a

href="http://forum.no2id.net/viewtopic.php?p=100808"><strong>polls show that

most people already do</strong></a> - then please tell your friends, family and

colleagues about this.</p> <p>To find out more, and what you can do to stop it,

<a href="/datasharing.php"><strong>CLICK HERE.</strong></a>.</p> <br />

<h1 style="clear:none"><a name="stalker_state"></a>THE HOME OFFICE'S GUINEA-PIGS</h1>

<p>At the end of November, the first of seven centres due to issue 'ID cards

for foreign nationals' opened for business.

<a href="http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/11/413526.html"><strong>NO2ID and

others were there to protest</strong></a>, and also

<a href="http://www.indymedia.org.uk/media/2008/11//413487.mov"><strong>at other

locations around the country [video]</strong></a>. We wrote a letter, signed by

a broad range of figures in the public eye, to draw attention to what was going

on. An edited version of it was published in the Telegraph, but you can

<a href="/downloads/TelegraphLetter27NOV08.pdf"><strong>read the full text and see

who signed here</strong></a>.</p>

<p><a href="/downloads/TelegraphLetter27NOV08.pdf"><img src="/images/telegraph.jpg" alt="NO2ID letter to the Telegraph"

width="400" height="108" style="float:left;margin:5px;" /></a></p>

<p>Gratifyingly, the <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/telegraph-view/3563758/Britain-cant-afford-ID-cards.html">

<strong>Telegraph leader article</strong></a> the following day picked up on our theme.</p>

<p>Thinking people are simply not fooled by the government's transparent

attempts to scrape up populist support for its ailing ID scheme. Expect more

Home Office PR and spin in coming weeks, as the first cards &#8211; actually

biometric residence permits, issued under a completely different law than the

Identity Cards Act 2006 - are issued.</p>

<p>We would like to thank local NO2ID groups across the UK who managed to get

hundreds of others including university vice-chancellors, professors,

councillors, MPs and other well-known people to sign a variant of our letter.

Special mention must go to Cambridge, who not only got over 100 signatories but

prompted a <a href="http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/cn_news_home/DisplayArticle.asp?ID=368554">

<strong>front page article in the Cambridge Evening News</strong></a>.</p>

<p>Proof positive that local action really <em>does</em> work.</p>

<br />

<h1 style="clear:none"><a name="stalker_state"></a>A LIFETIME OF ID CONTROL - AT A PRICE</h1>

<p>After years of little more than hot air from a sequence of

Home Secretaries, we're

<a href="http://www.ips.gov.uk/identity/downloads/NIS_Legislation.pdf">

<strong>finally getting to see the fine detail</strong> [836KB PDF]</a> of

what "ID cards" will really mean to the average person. It may be quite a

shock to those who haven't been paying attention.</p>

<p>It is not just the sheer amount of personal information that you will

be required to surrender &#8211; a wake-up for any remaining who thought

this was a simple card - it is the threats that will be used to force

compliance. You could have &#163;1000 penalties sent to you by

e-mail* if IPS thinks you've been bad &#8211; and why

might they think that?</p>

<p>If you fail to turn up at a time and place of their choosing; refuse

to be fingerprinted, photographed or hand over documents

(e.g. birth or marriage certificates); fail to tell them you've

moved house for 3 months.</p>

<p>And anything that <em>they</em> reckon is "deliberate or reckless"

provision of incorrect information could lead to 2 years in prison.</p>

<p>Welcome to a lifetime of state identity control...</p><br />

<p>* Only the first official warning need be by

letter, and that'll give you just a fortnight to comply.</p><br />

<h3><a name="fnf"></a>Freedom Not Fear</h3>

<p><a href="/resources/flashcomp.php">

<img src="/images/FNFmosaic_small.jpg" width="250"

height="203" alt="Click to see full size" title="Click to see full size"

style="float:left; margin:0 5px 5px 0;" /></a>Thanks to

everyone who sent in a picture of the database state for The Big Picture

on Parliament Square. You'll find a report of the protest with more

pictures on the <a href="http://www.openrightsgroup.org/2008/10/11/freedom-not-fear-the-big-picture-unveiled-on-parliament-square/">

Open Rights Group website</a>. Click on the image to see a

higher-resolution version of The Big Picture mosaic.</p>

<br />

<h1 style="clear:none"><a name="stalker_state"></a>THE STALKER STATE</h1>

<p>The mainstream media has finally begun to pick up on

the appalling Communications Data Bill, which <strong>

<a href="http://www.opendemocracy.net/blog/ourkingdom-theme/phil-booth/2008/08/25/the-secret-silo-for-your-familys-data">

NO2ID has been warning people about</a></strong> since the

summer, and before.</p>

<p>As usual, the government is misdirecting the argument. It

says it won't be storing the content of your telephone or

internet use, as if that makes it all right. It

<strong>is</strong> proposing to record &#8212; for life &#8212;

the details of everyone you call or write to and what websites you

visit.</p>

<p>Monitoring your communications is more intrusive than searching

your home. It should only ever be done under warrant, with good

reason. The general convenience of the Home Office is a very bad

reason indeed.</p>

<p>Do you want the state (and anyone who can gain access to the

system) to have a record of your religious and political beliefs,

your sexual interests and relationships, your financial and medical

worries &#8212; "just in case" they ever become of interest to the

authorities? Were an individual to spy on you like this, it would be

called stalking. It is a crime.</p>

<p>You wouldn't tolerate someone creeping into your home at any time,

night and day, to go through your and your family's private things.

You shouldn't put up with this.</p>

<p><strong><a href="http://www.writetothem.com/">Write NOW to your MP</a></strong>,

expressing your disgust at the British government moving to spying

on its people continually, and ask what he or she intends to do about it.

(N.B. Please write in your own words &#8212; it is <strong>much</strong>

more effective.)</p>

<br />

<h1 style="clear:none">SOFT TARGETS</h1>

<p>Resistance to the database state is growing, but that has not discouraged Whitehall. It seems more determined than ever to sneak round obstacles using misdirection and to find new, softer, targets.</p>

<p>The <acronym title="Trades Unions Congress">TUC</acronym> has resolved

to oppose the National Identity Scheme "with all means at its disposal".

There is <a href="http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/0166b804-8a7c-11dd-a76a-0000779fd18c.html">

"deadlock"</a> over plans to force airlines and airports to have their

staff enrolled in the scheme. The Home Office has been exposed to near

universal derision over its online marketing exercise aimed at students

and young people, "<a href="http://www.mylifemyid.org/">mylifemyid.org</a>".</p>

<p>That doesn't mean plans are halted though. New targets and new PR exercises can easily be found if you have unlimited funds at your disposal.</p>

<p>Meg Hillier, Labour Minister for Identity, has claimed &#8212;

and as swiftly denied &#8212; that children as young as 14 may

be given ID cards under government plans. There are powers buried

in the Identity Cards Act that mean it could happen by regulation.

And children, we know, are a soft target. There has still been

surprisingly little outcry over the ContactPoint database of EVERY

child (and family) in the UK.</p>

<p>Latest of those soft targets are overseas students, and people seeking to settle in the UK with British husbands and wives. Those, people with strong reasons not to make a fuss, are the ones to be targeted for the new biometric card scheme that will act as a test bed for the ID scheme. Jacqui Smith's launch of "ID cards for foreigners" was a shameless piece of spin to try to associate the unpopular ID scheme with the popular policy of restricting immigration.</p>

<p>There's no real link. And it is unclear how much technology there is yet. But immigration law already gives the Home Office some of the powers it would like to exert over everyone, and so it has a free hand to try out, on a few selected foreign residents, the processes it eventually intends to use for everyone else.</p>

<br />

<h1 style="clear:none">WHILE THE CAT'S AWAY...</h1>

<p>Parliament is on holiday. No doubt to the relief of the officials driving forward the database state. With the politicians out of the way, a cadre of Home Office and Cabinet Office cronies is free to extend the tentacles of Whitehall.</p>

<p>This August, long term plans to monitor your movements and communications have moved on significantly. <em>Your</em> travel information, <em>your</em> phone and text records, <em>your</em> e-mail and internet usage are set to be monitored. Your personal details trafficked ever more widely among officials and to foreign powers.</p>

<p>The Home Secretary has been <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/2582164/Machines-to-scan-faces-of-travellers-at-UK-airports.html">hyping "biometrics" at Manchester airport</a> - a trial of 'facial recognition'. But in reality it is just an excuse <a href="http://ukpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5jVJat2V71amDJ9mSIo5Ghx093sLA">to get your passport electronically scanned</a>. "<b>e-Borders</b>" is about collecting massive amounts of detailed information on every traveller's journey for official use. The spin is all about 'foreigners' but the system applies with even greater force to UK citizens.</p>

<p>The spectre of <b>road-pricing</b> through a <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/fairdealfordrivers/2573876/Spy-in-the-sky-paves-way-for-road-pricing.html">'spy in the sky' technology</a> has also reappeared. Following everyone everywhere is the government's way of dealing with road problems.</p>

<p>And if you stay at home, you are to be watched there, too. Many people have been shocked to discover that Local Authorities have spy powers. But for years now hundreds of bodies have been able to authorise themselves to examine any of your phone, e-mail, text and web-browsing histories that have been held by phone and internet companies. Now there are determined efforts to make that easier. The Home Office is seeking to build a massive database of all <b>communications data</b>. <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/08/19/ukgov_uber_database/">Massive funding is already secretly committed</a>.</p>

<p>What could be done with such powers? Who would you trust with them? Whatever the purpose, it is certain that the very private information involved will be lost or fall into untrustworthy hands.</p>

<br />

<p><a href="/images/index.php"><img src="/images/cartoons/NO2ID_DavidDavis_small.jpg" width="250" height="177" alt="Click to see full size" title="Click to see full size" style="float:left; margin:0 5px 5px 0;" /></a>NO2ID congratulates David Davis on winning the Haltemprice and Howden by-election. We hope his example will encourage MPs of all parties and the general public to take a closer look at the growth of the database state.</p>

<h1 style="clear:none">'DATA SHARING REVIEW' - A NEW ATTACK ON PRIVACY</h1>

<p>Friday 11th July 2008 saw the publication of <a href="http://www.justice.gov.uk/docs/data-sharing-review.pdf">yet another government review</a>.</p>

<p>Perhaps it is no surprise that an enquiry led by Richard Thomas, the Information Commissioner, and Dr Mark Walport, the Director of the Wellcome Trust, proposes more powers and funding for the Information Commissioner's Office and to make life easier for medical researchers. But this was <em>supposed</em> to be an examination of the principles of government handling of personal data.</p>

<p>It disgracefully fails to recognise the magnitude of the database state. Apart from a feeble couple of lines on "the potential hazards associated with ambitious programmes of data sharing", Thomas and Walport dodge any serious discussion of the National Identity Scheme, NHS Electronic Care Records and Secondary Uses Service (SUS), ContactPoint or any other 'Transformational Government' initiative - and, worse, propose <em>weakening</em> privacy protections by allowing ministers to fast-track data-trafficking proposals through Parliament with even less scrutiny than at present.</p>

<p>You might wonder whether that indicates any real concern about the 'hazards' to those whose lives are affected by such data.</p>

<p>If you want to see a truly positive approach, we recommend you read <a href="http://www.justice.gov.uk/docs/NO2ID-Data-Sharing-Response.pdf">NO2ID's submission to the enquiry</a>. We think we should take advantage of technology to deliver real protection and real privacy - and that we need new, clearer law to make you 'owner' of information about you.</p>

<p>Data protection isn't privacy. Regulation of officials by officials will always be inadequate. What is needed are ways for you to decide who to trust, and for you to keep control. Privacy rights that can be directly enforced by the millions of people whose interests are actually at stake will not be casually abused.</p><br />

<h1 style="clear:none">WHITEHALL WHITEWASH IGNORES THE SIMPLE SOLUTION</h1>

<p>Only eight months after losing millions of families' financial details, and just before Parliament goes into recess... it is time to release the official reports, all at once:</p>

<ul>

<li>Poynter Review of information security at HM Revenue and Customs (<a href="http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/0/1/poynter_review250608.pdf">1MB PDF / 109 pages</a>)</li>

<li>IPCC report into loss of data at HMRC (<a href="http://www.ipcc.gov.uk/final_hmrc_report_25062008.pdf">144KB PDF / 61 pages</a>)</li>

<li>O'Donnell report on Data Handling Procedures in Government (<a href="http://www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/~/media/assets/www.cabinetoffice.gov.uk/csia/dhr/dhr080625%20pdf.ashx">218KB PDF / 46 pages</a>)</li>

<li>Burton report into the Loss of MOD Personal Data (<a href="http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/3E756D20-E762-4FC1-BAB0-08C68FDC2383/0/burton_review_rpt20080430.pdf">1.1MB PDF / 76 pages</a>)</li>

</ul>

<p>Maybe these dense documents, some of which were done before the May elections, are appearing now as holiday reading for ministers. There are "serious institutional deficiencies" and "woefully inadequate" processes not just at HMRC but all across government. There's no point trying to blame isolated individuals. It is systemic.</p>

<p>The Information Commissioner suggests "formal enforcement action" for "deplorable failures" - departments should produce progress reports on Data Protection compliance. The <em>criminal</em> act would be for HMRC to fail to file yet another report in a year's time. It is like teaching small boys hygiene by sending them to play in mud. </p>

<p>None of the reports notes how more projects just add more risks. The ID Scheme, NHS Programme for IT, and ContactPoint (cataloguing the personal life of every child) - among others - will massively increase the information in government hands.</p>

<p>Nor does any of them address the most sensible solution: stop the database state. Government should collect less data. "Data minimisation" was the unambiguous recommendation of the MPs on the Home Affairs Committee.</p>

<p>Ministers blame officials. Officials blame procedures. But it doesn't matter who is to blame when the breakdown of huge systems is inevitable. Until "information sharing" is institutionally impossible, the only way to keep your privacy safe is not to let officials have your personal information in the first place.</p><br />

<h1 style="clear:none">THREE STRIKES - and ID <em>should</em> be out</h1>

<p>With the publication of the Home Affairs Select Committee report: "A Surveillance Society?" the ID scheme gets its third official black mark in four months. The committee of MPs of all parties demanded that:</p>

<blockquote>"The Government should give an explicit undertaking to adhere to a principle of data minimisation and should resist a tendency to collect more personal information and establish larger databases. Any decision to create a major new database, to share information on databases, or to implement proposals for increased surveillance, should be based on a proven need."</blockquote>

<p>This is NO2ID's view too. We're glad they agree. However, it is totally incompatible with the conception of a <a href="https://www.no2id.net/IDSchemes/whyNot.php">National Identity Register</a> that would store and control all essential facts about everyone for life, in order to support broader data-sharing across government. James Hall, the head of the Identity and Passport Service <a href="http://www.civilservicenetwork.com/news/article.html?tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=16555&tx_ttnews%5BbackPid%5D=29&cHash=">wrote last year</a>:</p>

<blockquote>[Joined-up government] will demand increased inter-departmental co-operation and will, by its nature, involve sharing more data about an individual between public sector organisations. The national identity scheme is being designed to meet that public expectation of improved services and joined-up government.</blockquote>

<p>That is data maximisation.</p>

<p>Last <em>month</em> the committee of technology experts appointed by the Government complained [<a href="http://www.ips.gov.uk/identity/downloads/ISAP_Annual_Report.pdf">ISAP

Report, 156kb PDF</a>] that the scheme lacks "robust and transparent operational data governance regime and clear data architecture".</p>

<p>In other words, it is an insecure muddle.</p>

<p>And back in March, Sir James Crosby, commissioned by Gordon Brown when he was Chancellor to look into "identity assurance", laid out <a href="https://www.no2id.net/news/pressRelease/release.php?name=Crosby_10">ten

clear principles for the design of a universal identity system</a>. The Home Office was already breaking every one, but had the gall to claim Crosby's report justified its scheme.</p>

<p>It's official: wrong in principle, shoddily built, and a threat to privacy. The ID card project must be stopped.</p><br />

<h1 style="clear:none">AN UNPRINCIPLED SCHEME</h1>

<p>The Home Secretary has announced the government's <a href="http://www.ips.gov.uk/identity/downloads/national-identity-scheme-delivery-2008.pdf">2008 'Delivery Plan'</a> [PDF] for the ID scheme, a plan that NO2ID showed - <a href="http://wikileaks.cx/leak/nis-options-analysis-outcome.pdf">with leaked documents</a> [PDF] - in January to be little more than a marketing exercise. Nothing has changed.</p>

<p>On the same day, almost a year late, the Treasury published the review that Gordon Brown commissioned from Sir James Crosby in 2006. No wonder it's been kept under wraps for so long. The government's own advisor lays out ten broad principles for the design of a "consumer-driven universal ID assurance system" scheme - <strong>and the Home Office ID scheme breaks them all</strong>.</p>

<p>1. Any scheme should be restricted to enabling citizens to assert their identity ... <strong>BROKEN</strong></p>

<p>2. Governance should inspire trust. It should be independent of Government ... <strong>BROKEN</strong></p>

<p>3. The amount of data stored should be minimised. Full biometric images (other than photographs) should not be kept ... <strong>BROKEN</strong></p>

<p>4. Citizens should "own" their entry. It should not be possible, except for national security, for any data to be shared without informed consent ... <strong>BROKEN</strong></p>

<p>5. Enrolment should minimise costs and give citizens a hassle-free experience ... <strong>BROKEN</strong></p>

<p>6. To respond to consumers and give benefits, it should be capable of being rolled out quickly ... <strong>BROKEN</strong></p>

<p>7. Citizens who lose cards or whose identity is compromised should be able to get it fixed quickly and efficiently ... <strong>BROKEN</strong></p>

<p>8. The scheme's systems should work with existing, efficient, bank systems to reduce risks ... <strong>BROKEN</strong></p>

<p>9. To engage consumers enrolment and cards should be provided free of charge ... <strong>BROKEN</strong></p>

<p>10. The market should play a role in creating standards, to ensure ease of use and minimise costs ... <strong>BROKEN</strong></p>

<p>And finally - unless we've overlooked something - the Home Office published the <a href="http://www.ips.gov.uk/identity/downloads/IPS-Omnibus-Report-Wave-3.pdf">results of its latest survey</a> [PDF]. The Home Secretary bluffs and blusters that the benefits of ID cards are "undoubted", but her own department's research shows that while three-quarters of people consider the claimed benefits to be "very important", only just over one quarter consider them to be "very believable".</p>

<p>Unprincipled. Unchanged. Unbelievable.</p><br />

<p>[For an explanation of how each principle has been broken, see <a href="/news/pressRelease/release.php?name=Crosby_10">NO2ID's press release on the Crosby Review</a>.]</p><br />

<h1 style="clear:none">HOME OFFICE'S SECRET CHANGE OF PLAN</h1>

<p>Though some say Gordon Brown is putting off the ID scheme until after the next general election, the evidence tells a different story. Plans are racing onwards, and there has been a violent swerve in the policy. Officials across government are plotting how to bully and dupe people onto the ID database as quickly as they can. This is a radically different plan from those <a href="http://www.ips.gov.uk/identity/downloads/Strategic-Action-Plan.pdf">already published</a>.</p>

<p>Out go fingerprints (for some), exposing the lie that "biometrics will secure your personal information". And out goes the pretence that this is all being driven by "necessary" changes to the passport. They are working on "various forms of coercion" for particular groups of workers, young people and students, people who need to open a bank account and anyone wanting to drive. (A campaign of intimidation has already started: employers are being frightened into demanding Home Office approved forms of ID <em>from all job applicants</em>, under <a href="http://www.bia.homeoffice.gov.uk/sitecontent/documents/employersandsponsors/guidancefrom290208/guidance/summaryguidance0208.pdf">threats of massive fines</a> if they employ an illegal immigrant inadvertently.)</p>

<p>You don't have to take our word for it, you can read these leaked plans yourself, with NO2ID's explanatory notes:</p>

<p align="center"><a href="http://wikileaks.cx/leak/nis-options-analysis-outcome.pdf"><img src="/images/coercion.jpg" alt="Link to leaked Home Office document" width="400" height="83" /></a></p>

<p>Those building the scheme are preparing this new strategy for the Government to rubber-stamp. If the ministers are actually in charge, then it is not apparent.</p>

<p>The Government should:</p>

<ul>

<li>Halt <strong>immediately</strong> all work on ID cards and the National Identity Register, and issue no further contracts;</li>

<li>Publish <strong>in full</strong> the several independent reviews of the scheme that it has ordered but suppressed: the Office of Government Commerce Gateway Reviews, KPMG's review of costings and the report of Sir James Crosby's investigation of "identity management" on behalf of Gordon Brown;</li>

<li>Scrap the non-statutory 'Citizen Information Project' &ndash; quietly merged with the ID programme after the Act was passed &ndash; so that it is not possible for the scheme to continue "under another label".</li>

<li>Repeal the Identity Cards Act 2006, which was passed under false pretences and is too dangerous to stay on the statute books.</li>

</ul>

<p>You have been lied to. The scheme is <strong>not</strong> voluntary. It is <strong>not</strong> proceeding according to published plans.</p>

<p>Don't be fooled, fight back... <strong><a href="/pledge/index.php">Make the NO2ID Pledge</a></strong>.</p>

<p>Get informed &ndash; <strong><a href="http://88.80.13.160/wiki/National_Identity_Scheme_Options_Analysis_Outcome">show the leaked document</a></strong> to your family and friends... Join the resistance. <strong><a href="https://www.no2id.net/getInvolved/join.php">Join NO2ID</a></strong>.</p>

<h1 style="clear:none">WHY YOU SHOULD BE WORRIED ABOUT 'DATA-SHARING'... AND WHAT YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT</h1>

<p>"Information sharing" is supposed to sound nice. But think about it - gossip is information sharing.</p>

<p>There is still almost daily news of the government mislaying confidential personal information. Well over a month after HMRC lost 25 million people's records - including millions of unencrypted bank account details - you would hope that ministers and officials would be taking things seriously.</p>

<p>The <a href="http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/E/E/poynter_review171207.pdf">flimsy 6-page official 'interim report'</a> shows the reality. After four weeks of 'investigation', there's no clue that what happened is anything other than normal.</p>

<p>Meanwhile... evidence that it <strong>is</strong> normal: <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7147715.stm">3 million learner drivers' details lost in Iowa</a> (why collect so much private information in one place, let alone pass it around?) and <a href="http://www.sundaymirror.co.uk/news/sunday/2007/12/23/9-trusts-lose-files-98487-20264126/">hundreds of thousands of patients' details go missing</a> from nine seperate NHS Trusts.</p>

<p>Anyone receiving any sort of regular payment from the government (benefit, salary, or fees) should care as much about official information handling habits as they already do about hospital or food hygiene. So should anyone applying for a license or a permit.</p>

<p>So should anyone who receives a pension.</p>

<p>Hidden behind the headlines, HMRC has been steadily exposing the private details of tens of thousands of pensioners, giving away the keys to their pension funds. Just before 'Disc-gate', it was <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/11/05/standard_life_lost_cd_security_flap/">Standard Life customers</a> - now it's <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/7149767.stm">Countrywide Assured's</a>. In fact, HMRC has been forced to apologise for <em>seven</em> such breaches.</p>

<p>"Reviews" achieve nothing. They are intended to: the whole purpose is to let officialdom carry on as before.</p>

<p><a href="/pledge/index.php"><img src="/images/pledgeCertificate.jpg" alt="The NO2ID Pledge certificate" width="240" height="170" style="float:left;margin:0 5px 5px 0;"/></a>The truth is that <strong>the main threat to the security of your identity</strong> is Mr Brown's <a href="http://www.cio.gov.uk/transformational_government/index.asp">"Transformational Government" data-sharing policies</a>. You cannot keep personal information private if you give it to a government that is itching to pass it around.</p>

<p>The government cannot now be trusted. People across the country are deciding they can choose for themselves who they are and who they trust. <a href="/pledge/index.php">The NO2ID Pledge</a> is a way of declaring to your friends and neighbours that you will not cooperate with any further government seizure of your personal information.</p>

<p>Why not make it your New Year's Revolution?</p>

<h1 style="clear:none">STOP THIS DATABASE MADNESS <strong>NOW</strong></h1>

<p>With the news of <a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article2983759.ece">yet another serious data breach</a>, compromising the confidential details of over 40,000 people, coming less than a fortnight after HMRC lost the records of every family in the country, NO2ID renews its call for a <strong>complete and independent</strong> audit of <strong>all</strong> personal information held by government.</p>

<p>Who has what, who is it shared with, and how else is it abused? Demand answers from your MP - keep using <a href="http://www.writetothem.com/"><strong>www.WriteToThem.com</strong></a>. You have a right to know.</p>

<p>The separate reviews that Gordon Brown has proposed will inevitably be aimed at superficial failure of departmental procedure and not touch on the malignancy at the core of government policy.</p>

<p>Why hasn't the Ministry of Justice's upcoming legislative programme (paragraph A.5 of the recently-published <a href="http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/pbr_csr/psa/pbr_csr07_psaindex.cfm">Service Transformation Agreement</a>), explicitly intended "to overcome current barriers to information sharing within the public sector" been axed? And why do ministers lie and lie again, saying that personal information on the proposed National Identity Register will be "protected by biometrics". It won't be. It <em>can't</em> be.</p>

<p><a href="/pledge/index.php"><img src="/images/pledgeCertificate.jpg" alt="The NO2ID Pledge certificate" width="240" height="170" style="float:left;margin:0 5px 5px 0;"/></a>The men currently charged by Gordon Brown to look at data protection across government are the overstretched Information Commissioner - whose remit means he can only suggest more regulation of the sort that hasn't worked here, and which Whitehall will route around - and Dr Mark Walport, a strong advocate of "a national system of linked data" - one of the last people you'd want fighting for your personal privacy.</p>

<p>So it's time we did something ourselves.</p>

<p>The only way to stop them abusing your confidence is not to yield it in the first place. That is why NO2ID is giving <a href="/pledge/index.php"><strong>The NO2ID Pledge</strong></a> to everyone in the country who wants to fight. If enough people publicly declare they will not cooperate, government seizure of personal identity will become impossible.</p>

<h1 style="clear:both;">CALL TO ACTION: SCRAP THE ID SCHEME *NOW*</h1>

<p>As the scandal around the HMRC Child Benefit data breach intensifies, <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/idcards/story/0,,2215081,00.html">even some sceptical Labour MPs</a> are calling for a (temporary) halt to the ID cards scheme. This is not enough. MPs of all parties should be calling for the immediate and permanent scrapping of the Home Office's "identity management" programme.</p>

<p>Not just the card, not just the database, but also the mass 'data-sharing' that lies at the heart of government ID policy.</p>

<p>NOW is the time to write to your MP <a href="http://www.writetothem.com/"><strong>via WriteToThem.com</strong></a> asking that he or she demand an immediate and permanent stop to all development of ID cards and a National Identity Register.</p>

<p>If you don't already know his or her position, you can check how your MP voted on the ID cards legislation at <a href=" http://www.theyworkforyou.com/"><strong>TheyWorkForYou.com</strong></a>.</p>

<p>Be polite, be concise and make your points clearly &#8212; read <a href="https://www.no2id.net/downloads/print/NO2ID-HowtoLobby.pdf"><strong>NO2ID's lobbying guide</strong></a> (21KB PDF file) for advice on how to write an effective letter. Absolutely insist. The more MPs that receive mail on this from their constituents, the more the pressure will build to drop the scheme.</p>

<h1 style="clear:both;">NOW THE DATABASE STATE CLAIMS 25,000,000 BRITISH VICTIMS</h1>

<p>It's hard to know whether to laugh or cry. The cabinet insists we should

trust them to manage everyone's life through a National Identity

Register. Meanwhile <acronym title="Her Majesty's Revenues and Customs">HMRC</acronym>

has mislaid discs containing the names, dates

of birth, national insurance numbers and bank details of 25 million

British people &#8212; more than seven million families.</p>

<p>The package was sent in the state's internal post &#8212; and was neither

recorded nor registered. The value to organised crime of the information

on the two "lost" discs is incalculable &#8212; but certainly runs into

hundreds of millions of pounds. The government, of course, blames junior

officials for a failure to follow protocols.</p>

<p>But it simply <strong>should not be possible</strong> for junior staff &#8212;

or the chancellor himself &#8212; to collect or copy such details in one place. That

it is, is a direct result of the government's obsession with centralised

databases and its contempt for citizens' privacy.</p>

<p>Something positive may come of it, though. With your help, NO2ID can use

this a clear illustration of the real danger in state control of

personal identity to defeat the ID scheme quickly.</p>

<p>The news comes just as NO2ID is raising desperately needed funds for a

legal challenge to the database state. We have <a href="/pledge/">

contacted all 11,000+ citizens</a> who <a href="http://www.pledgebank.com/refuse">

pledged to contribute &#163;10 to a legal defence fund</a>. If you didn't join

that pledge, it's not too late to <a href="/pledge/">help</a>.</p>

<p>If you're one of the 25,000,000 people who have already been exposed by

the government, please help us make sure that this never happens again.

If you're one of those lucky ones whose private information hasn't been

lost in the internal post, please help us keep you safe.</p>

<p>To win the fight we don't just need funds for legal action. To keep up

the pressure and battle the government's publicity machine costs money.

If you haven't <a href="/getInvolved/join.php">joined NO2ID already</a>,

or if you haven't <a href="/getInvolved/donate.php">given to our general

funds recently</a>, please do so now. Thank you for your support.</p>

<h1 style="clear:both;">REFUSE TO COMPLY</h1>

<p><a href="/images/index.php"><img src="/images/cartoons/pledge.gif" width="250" height="177" alt="Click to see full size" title="Click to see full size" style="float:left; margin:0 5px 5px 0;"></a>Remember the Poll Tax? In 1987 a popular Conservative government was re-elected by a landslide against an "unelectable" opposition. One manifesto commitment was a proposal to reform local taxation. Policy makers thought it was a pretty good idea. The public scarcely noticed.</p>

<p>Only three years later, the universally hated Poll Tax was causing mass disobedience, even riots. Many of those who paid it without fuss still hated it. They hated it particularly because of how it was collected. It was intrusive. The council wanted to know where you lived and who lived with you.</p>

<p>It was the end of Margaret Thatcher. Her successors swiftly replaced the policy, but could not regain trust. Everything that went wrong in the 80s, before the Poll Tax, the electorate forgave the Tories. For everything that went wrong after the Poll Tax, the Tories were blamed. Inventing the Poll Tax didn't do that. Implementing it did.</p>

<p>In 2005 a still-popular Labour government was re-elected against an "unelectable" opposition. One manifesto commitment, sold on that occasion as immigration control, was a National Identity Register. Policy makers thought it was a pretty good idea. The public scarcely noticed.</p>

<p>But when they are summoned to an official interview about who they are and where they live - they'll notice.</p>

<p>NO2ID has now <a href="/pledge/index.php"><strong>called in the pledged donations</strong></a> of over 11,000 people who in 2005 committed themselves to donate to a legal defence fund to fight the government's ID scheme. Every one of those people has also declared that they will refuse to register for an ID card.</p>

<p>If you think you, not the government should own your identity, then <a href="/getInvolved/join.php"><strong>please join the campaign</strong></a>. Every penny will be spent fighting for <em>real</em> liberty and privacy.</p><br />

<h1 style="clear:both;">LOOKING GLASS WORDS</h1>

<p><img src="/images/cartoons/humptyg.gif" width="212" height="252" alt="Humpty Brown says one thing and does another" title="Humpty Brown Humpty Brown says one thing and does another" style="float:left; margin:0 5px 5px 0;"></a>Gordon Brown <a href="http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page13630.asp">talks about 'liberty'</a> and yet is driving us towards a "papers, please" Britain with people more watched and supervised by the state than anywhere in the western world.</p>

<p>He lauds 'data protection'. But Britain has the weakest data-protection law in Europe. <a href="http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,2180729,00.html">A third of the EU Data Protection Directive is missing or unenforceable here</a>. Meanwhile, what commitment to 'protection' of your personal and family life is shown by creating open access to family and medical records for hundreds of thousands of public officials?</p>

<p>He talks about 'privacy' yet <em>in the same speech</em> acknowledges he is pushing ahead with an ID scheme that will build a detailed dossier on every resident of the UK. And he is actively removing what barriers there are to your personal information being shared by officials without your knowledge or consent.</p>

<p>And he trumpets "Freedom of Information". A free-for-all in Whitehall, maybe, but the Treasury is right now spending your tax money in court appeals against the Information Commissioner and Information Tribunal to keep the 2004 'Gateway Reviews' of the ID programme from the public.</p>

<p>Smokescreen 'debate' can't conceal the government's authoritarian agenda.</p>

<p><strong>Mr Brown, you're fooling no-one</strong>.</p>

<p>NO2ID demands repeal of the Identity Cards Act 2006 and meaningful privacy protection. We need your support - now, more than ever.</p>

<p>If you think you, not the government should own your identity, then <a href="/getInvolved/join.php"><strong>please join or make a donation</strong></a>. Every penny will be spent fighting for <em>real</em> liberty and privacy.</p><br />

<h1 style="clear:both;">DNA - LET'S BE REALISTIC</h1>

<p>In response to comments by Lord Justice Sedley, <a href="http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/crime/article2934322.ece">the Prime Minister says he has no plans to put everyone onto the National DNA Database</a>. We believe him. It would be impossibly expensive.</p>

<p>In reality, however, various interested groups <em>are</em> lobbying to expand DNA sampling by the police. There is always pressure for a bigger database, more powers. The current <a href="http://police.homeoffice.gov.uk/operational-policing/powers-pace-codes/PACE-Review">Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) review</a> is seriously considering taking DNA from people stopped for 'non-recordable' offences, <a href="http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/crime/article2183105.ece">such as littering or traffic violations</a>.</p>

<p>Both the new Chairman of the Home Affairs Select Committee, Keith Vaz MP, and the <a href="http://www.nuffieldbioethics.org/go/ourwork/bioinformationuse/publication_441.html">Nuffield Council on Bioethics</a> say that it is "unjustified" to keep on the database people who have not been convicted of any offence. But now records are removed only rarely, with <a href="http://www.genewatch.org/sub-539488">the special approval of a Chief Constable</a>. You have no rights over your sample. The Nuffield Council says the law in England and Wales should be brought more in line with Scotland, with DNA profiles used in evidence, but <em>kept</em> only for convicted criminals.</p>

<p>Lord Sedley is worried that the current system is unfair. But the real proposals for expanding the database would make that worse, with more disproportion and more scope for errors. And a recent ICM poll shows <a href="http://www.icmresearch.co.uk/pdfs/2007_sept_no2id_identity_cards_poll.pdf">a majority of people do NOT support the taking of DNA for minor offences</a>.</p>

<p>DNA does have a vital function in some criminal investigations. But the Home Office line is that samples from innnocent individuals should never, ever be discarded - just in case they might come in useful one day. As a police tool it is weakened by making it just another pretext for the database state.</p><br />

<h1 style="clear:both;">HOME OFFICE ID ESTIMATES RISE TO £7.5 BILLION</h1>

<p><a href="/images/index.php"><img src="/images/cartoons/NO2ID_elephant_bed.jpg" width="250" height="177" alt="Click to see full size" title="Click to see full size" style="float:left; margin:0 5px 5px 0;"></a>Desperate to be seen to be doing <em>something</em>, the government has finally got around to inviting expressions of interest from potential suppliers who might wish to bid for elements of its National Identity Scheme.</p>

<p>Those paying attention will note that no contracts have been awarded. No specifications have been issued. But <a href="http://www.computerworlduk.com/management/government-law/public-sector/news/index.cfm?newsid=4224">over £72 million of taxpayers' money has already been spent</a>.</p>

<p>And, far from a "£2 billion" total that the directors of the scheme are now trying to claim for the project, the formal notice in the Official Journal of the European Union clearly shows how the biometric visas budget and e-Borders (£1.2 billion) and the money creatively accounted as belonging to the Foreign Office budget for the last 'Dobson Report' (£510 million) are really part of the same grand plan. Add that to <a href="http://politics.guardian.co.uk/homeaffairs/story/0,,2077202,00.html?gusrc=rss&feed=11">the admitted £5.75 billion estimate for passports and ID cards</a>, and you can see - on the government's own figures - the scheme is already costing <em>£7.5 billion</em>. <strong>That's over £250 from every taxpayer to set up a card that's 'only' supposed to cost £30</strong>. No wonder the Home Office has been keeping its figures secret - and its not even counting what it will cost you in time and money to use, of course.</p>

<p>The latest spin comes straight after the BBC's <em>File On 4</em> got James Hall, the head of the ID project to admit that:</p>

<ul>

<li>his department does not yet know "the precise details of how we deliver this";</li><br />

<li>"there aren't a formal set of costs" for the use of ID across government; and</li><br />

<li>claimed "savings" have been "over-aggressive".</li></ul>

<p>Meanwhile a top biometrics expert who was a consultant to the IPS has revealed that using fingerprints can be expected to produce <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/file_on_4/6922882.stm">tens of thousands of false results by the time even 10% of the population are enrolled</a>.</p>

<p>A massive cost in money AND unnecessary suspicion. For what?</p><br />

<h1 style="clear:both;">NO, PRIME MINISTER</h1>

<p>Gordon Brown is talking nonsense. His assertion at Prime Minister's Questions that more and more people want ID cards doesn't match the facts. The truth is that the more people <a href="/IDSchemes/index.php">find out about it</a>, the less they like the ID scheme.</p>

<ul><li>Every independent poll since the legislation was introduced has shown ID cards to be dramatically less popular than the government claims. Parliamentary opposition is as solid as ever, and concern about the 'surveillance society' is greater than ever.</li><br />

<li>A large majority simply don't trust the government to keep the information on the ID database confidential. In fact, <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/graphics/2006/12/04/nyougov04big.gif">82% of the public believe there's a danger that their personal information will be divulged improperly</a>.</li><br />

<li>His own new justice mininster, and Chancellor, former MI5 boss Stella Rimington, senior police officers (including a former head of Special Branch, now Deputy Assistant Commissioner of the Met) and security experts from academia and industry have all said ID cards won't stop crime or terrorism.</li></ul>

<p>The new Prime Minister has promised change. He says he wants to re-establish trust. To show a genuine break with the past he should drop the ID scheme, not try to paint it as more popular than ever when it just isn't. That sounds like spin.</p>

<p>It is time to take a serious look at the ID scheme, Mr Brown. It has been offered to solve every problem in Whitehall - but never explained how. Most people don't want ID cards, when they take time to think about the details.</p>

<p>Neither should you.</p><br />

<h1 style="clear:both;">HOW TO HIDE A BILLION POUNDS</h1>

<p><a href="/images/index.php"><img src="/images/cartoons/NO2ID_elephant.jpg" width="250" height="177" alt="Click to see full size" title="Click to see full size" style="float:left; margin:0 5px 5px 0;"></a>The Home Office has now quietly published its <a href="http://www.identitycards.gov.uk/downloads/2007-05-10CostReport.pdf">six-monthly report [108 KB PDF]</a> (actually more of a seven-monthly report, despite the law that says it must be six-monthly) into the cost of the ID scheme, taking advantage of the fact that most media time this week will be taken up with assessments of Tony Blair's past and future.</p>

<p>It is fifteen pages long, yet contains more flannel than figures. The figures themselves show that the cost estimate is up again. And despite these being the Home Office's most optimistically presented, and entirely unsupported, projections, the total cost is up by nearly a billion pounds (£1,000,000,000) over the 10 years covered by the report.</p>

<p>It isn't stated as plainly as that. To find out you have to add together the sums shown separately for UK citizens and for foreign nationals, who also have to be registered with new visa arrangements and ID cards, AND £510 million pounds included in the previous estimate for the cost to ex-pats but now being ignored as belonging to the FCO, not the Home Office.</p>

<p>The tracking of everybody will be run through the same computer systems, but the pretense is that the fingerprinting and registration of foreigners and the fingerprinting and registration of UK citizens at home and abroad are somehow separate programmes, so the costs are independent. They aren't. Nor are the costs to you or to other branches of government of actually using the scheme. All the Report estimates is the administration costs of the scheme itself, fairly creatively accounted.</p>

<p>Perhaps it is worth remembering that when the scheme was first announced, as "entitlement cards", back in 2002 the cost was estimated at between £1.3 billion and £3.1 billion - over a longer period of 13 years.</p>

<p>Nor do we "have to do this for electronic passports". That's already been done. They have been being issued for 18 months. The only reason for the cost and inconvenience of the ID scheme is so the Home Office can keep a file on you, in case it comes in useful one day to know all about you.</p>

<br />

<h1 style="clear:both;">WHY IS THE GOVERNMENT BREAKING ITS OWN ID LAWS?</h1>

<p>Section 37 of the Identity Cards Act 2006 requires the Home Secretary to publish his estimate of the ten-year cost of the ID scheme "<em>before the end of every six months</em>". The first Dobson report [1] was published on 9th October 2006. The next is already more than three weeks overdue.</p>

<p>Is the timing important? It can't be lack of resources. There are dozens of highly-paid consultants doing nothing but planning the scheme.</p>

<p>But the latest cost estimates matter to local government. The Government is hiding the cost to councils - even from its own councillors.</p>

<p>The local elections and Scottish Parliament and Welsh Assembly elections on May 3rd were a test for policy. The ID scheme is unpopular. 1 in 3 people across the UK, if we are to believe <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6526225.stm">recently-revealed government figures</a>, are expected to resist it. Labour Party candidates, whatever their personal views on the scheme, suffer when public attention is drawn to it. Burying bad news?</p>

<p>---</p>

<p>[1] Frank Dobson MP moved the amendment that created the report.</p><br />

<h3>AND WHAT'S THE BIG SECRET?</h3>

<p>After over two years and four months of evasion, legal wrangling and appeals, the Office of Government Commerce (OGC) - a Treasury department - has <a href="http://www.informationtribunal.gov.uk/Files/ourDecisions/office_of_govern_commerce_v_infocomm%20_2May07.pdf">been told by the Information Tribunal</a> that it must publish its early Gateway reviews of the ID Cards Programme in full. Given 28 days to comply, the Treasury may yet waste even more taxpayers' money by appealing to the High Court.</p>

<p>The saga began in January 2005 when Mark Dziecielewski (founder of the <a href="http://www.spy.org.uk/cgi-bin/spy.pl">Watching Them, Watching Us</a> surveillance regulation campaign and member of NO2ID's Advisory Board) requested publication of the OGC's 'Stage Zero' reviews. Despite a <a href="http://www.ico.gov.uk/upload/documents/decisionnotices/2006/decision_notice_fs50070196.pdf">Decision Notice in favour of full disclosure</a> from the Information Commissioner in July 2006, the government has resisted disclosure at every stage - even engaging lawyers to fight a ruling under its own Freedom of Information Act.</p>

<p>What hasn't it been telling us? And why were Parliament and the public denied this (and other) information during the passage of the deeply controversial Identity Cards Bill? Someone obviously has <em>something</em> to hide...</p>

<br />

<h1 style="clear:both;">ID OPPONENTS SAY "TAKE A HIKE, TONY!"</h1>

<p><a href="http://www.renewforfreedom.net"><img src="/images/taht_factsheet.gif" width="210" height="295" alt="More information at www.renewforfreedom.net" title="More information at www.renewforfreedom.net." style="float:left; margin:0 5px 0 0;"></a>The next phase of the ID scheme is about to begin. Already the PM has torn up 2005's promises to Parliament about how the ID database will work. <a href="/news/pressRelease/release.php?name=Blair_Fact-Free">Now he backs police 'fishing expeditions'.</a> What next?</p>

<p>How do YOU fancy a 20-minute grilling by an official? Or a dossier on your private life built by bureaucrats? Do you know what official files say about you - what if they are wrong?</p>

<p>From April 2007 the UK Identity &amp; Passport Service begins to open ID interrogation centres - <a href="/getInvolved/idCentres.php">69 of them</a> this year. New passport applicants - mostly teenagers - will be guinea-pigs for <a href="/IDSchemes/whyNot.php">National Identity Scheme</a> enrolment.</p>

<p>At the head of the queue are 300,000 young people. You, or your family... soon to be treated as suspects.</p>

<p>A passport is not a right. Soon when you apply you'll be asked for lots of information about yourself: official numbers, old addresses, your education, that sort of thing. It will be used to look up everything about you: school, social services, police, and credit records, perhaps family details... to grab all your private information. "Data-rape", some people are calling it.</p>

<p>You may - later, you will - be summoned, at a time to suit the IPS. Photos and fingerprints will be taken. An "intrusive interview" will check that your answers about details of your life agree with the official ones. If they do, you'll get your passport. If not... it is not clear.</p>

<p>It takes time to assemble a file on you. The UK IPS estimates 1 in 4 will have to cancel their travel plans, because they do not get a passport in time.</p>

<p>Get a passport NOW. Tell your friends, if you think their private lives should be their own. If you do before the centres open, your chances of avoiding data-rape are good. And by fighting you'll help stop it happening to others.</p>

<p>Before you go wandering for your gap year or on holiday, tell Tony Blair and his bullying government to "Take a hike".</p>

<h1 style="clear:both;">EXPRESS TRAIN TO A SURVEILLANCE STATE</h1>

<p><a href="/images/index.php"><img src="/images/cartoons/efficiencyElephants_small.jpg" width="240" height="240" alt="Click for full cartoon" title="Click for full cartoon" style="float:left; margin:0 5px 5px 0;"></a>Mr Blair is at last coming clean. The plan <strong>is</strong> to track every detail of your life.</p>

<p>Before Christmas the Home Office said it would not create a "new, clean" ID database. It would link information on three existing ones. Ministers insisted that private details would be protected by security measures and the normal rules of confidentiality.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/01/14/ndata114.xml">The Prime Minister's new scheme</a> repudiates that promise, just three weeks on. Give personal information to an official in future and you'll lose control <em>forever</em> - you won't know who else sees it. You won't know what use it could be put to when the government has a new idea.</p>

<p><strong>The "database state" is near.</strong></p>

<p>Government doesn't trust us - why else such endless cross-checking? - but it expects us to give it absolute trust, absolute discretion. But the reason we have law is because human beings cannot be trusted with absolute power. By scrapping confidentiality, ministers give all officials the right to talk about us behind our backs. It means more petty bullying, jobs-worths and "the computer says NO".</p>

<p>That it means "efficiency" is not credible. Government IT systems often fail*, and ruin people's lives daily - and that's when working separately. How much worse if they were all linked?</p>

<p><strong>Railroaded?</strong></p>

<p>A spin warning: <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6260153.stm">according to the BBC</a>,<br />

<em>"So-called "citizens panels" will gauge public reaction to relaxing privacy procedures so people do not have to repeat personal information to different public bodies - particularly at times of stress such as a family death."</em></p>

<p>No trust here either. Real debate is too unpredictable. By controlling the questions considered by his discussion groups, Mr Blair intends to make sure that "the people" only tell him what he wants to hear.</p>

<br />

<p>*Just a few recent examples:<br />

<ul>

<li><a href="http://www.mailonsunday.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=387064&in_page_id=1770&ico=Homepage&icl=TabModule&icc=News&ct=5">The Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) brands thousands incorrectly as criminals</a></li>

<li><a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/06/30/eds_csa/">Child Support Agency 'meltdown'</a></li>

<li><a href="http://www.computerwire.com/industries/research/?pid=9980EA5E-043F-4F3E-B712-B52FB0616ECA">Half a billion for an IT system (Libra) that, after 8 years, only 'sort of' works in just twelve courts</a></li>

<li><a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=390116&in_page_id=1770">10,000 people a week are denied passports because a computer can't read their photo</a></li>

</ul></p>

<h1 style="clear:both;">BYRNE'S VILE ID SNAKE OIL</h1>

<p>It's New Year. What better time for a new pretext for the ever-changing ID scheme?</p>

<p>2007 begins with Home Office minister Liam Byrne telling us that <a href="http://www.labour.org.uk/index.php?id=news2005&ux_news%5Bid%5D=IDCards&cHash=7f1c3798bf">ID cards are "the solution" to people trafficking</a>. Another function for ID - and with an emotional hook to stop you thinking straight. Remember it also 'a solution' for terrorism and fraud. But not "the solution".</p>

<p>Let us think about this:</p>

<p>According to its <a href="http://www.identitycards.gov.uk/news-publications-general.asp">'Strategic Action Plan'</a>, the Home Office will begin collecting citizens' biometrics alongside those of asylum seekers some time in 2007 or 2008. It will also be introducing "biometric" visas soon: a fancy way of saying, fingerprinting some visitors.</p>

<p>With this scheme, if it works, <em>once nearly everybody has a card or a visa</em>, then you can find out who doesn't - by checking their number or re-fingerprinting them when they come into contact with an official. Making all public sector staff and many private sector employers into immigration officers, in effect.</p>

<p>Meanwhile people trafficking involves those who don't come into contact with officials. They are smuggled past borders, in unregistered work, avoiding checks - or in the worst cases locked-up as slaves.</p>

<p>It is these last we are meant to think of when Mr Byrne says "people trafficking". Particularly women enslaved by gangsters in brothels. It is disgusting the minister chooses to exploit them to sell the ID scheme.</p>

<p>Biometrics and ID cards won't 'catch illegals'. They just make illegal status rigid by removing grey areas.</p>

<p>The scheme wastes time for law-abiding citizens and visitors. It scarcely touches those trying to keep a low profile. It is wholly irrelevant to those who are forced to live in secret. (Except, if you can't live without a card, it is one more way to keep you captive.)</p>

<p>So, minister, you are spending billions on rebuilding three giant government computer systems, so that you can fingerprint Aunt Mabel and track her to her holiday home in Cleethorpes, and make Jack pass a hostile interrogation before you let him go on his gap-year. How does that help Marta from the Ukraine, who is not even sure which country she is living in any more?</p>

<h1 style="clear:both;">MERRY CHRISTMAS...</h1>

<p><a href="/resources/flashcomp.php"><img src="/images/cartoons/NO2IDxmas2006.jpg" width="460" height="321" alt="Click for special Xmas animation" title="Click for special Xmas animation" style="float:left; margin:0 5px 5px 0;"></a>...and a happy and peaceful, ID-free New Year. Click on the cartoon for our Xmas special animation.</p>

<p><a href="https://www.no2id.net/news/newsletters/newsletter.php?issue=61">Click here for NO2ID's Review of the Year</a>.</p>

<h1 style="clear:both;">DID THEY THINK NO ONE WAS LOOKING?</h1>

<p>Tuesday 19th was the last day of the Parliamentary term. So that's the day the Home Office chose to announce its delayed "Identity Management Action Plan", now called the <a href="http://www.identitycards.gov.uk/downloads/Strategic_Action_Plan.pdf">Strategic Action Plan for the National Identity Scheme</a> [pdf]. Mr Reid appears to have told Parliament, but his name doesn't appear on it. Ministers Byrne and Ryan, and Mr Hall of the IPS share the limelight.</p>

<p>At the weekend, we wrote, <em>Parliament rises on Tuesday 19th, so it seems unlikely we'll hear anything new about the ID programme until 2007 - unless there is an attempt to sneak something out under cover of bad news</em>.</p>

<p>And this looks like it. There's a sudden change of emphasis from ID cards to the Register and its use for data-sharing across government (chapters 1, 2 and 6).</p>