Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Mon Apr 20, 2026 11:28

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 17 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Dec 04, 2006 19:08 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
large link

Millions may resist database, says poll

By Philip Johnston, Home Affairs Editor

The first signs of a significant popular revolt against the Government's identity card scheme have been uncovered by a YouGov poll for The Daily Telegraph.

It suggests that hundreds of thousands of people, maybe even millions, would refuse to register on the proposed database that will underpin the scheme, even if this meant a fine or going to jail.

Despite ministerial claims during the passage of the ID Cards Act through parliament that there was widespread public support for the multi-billion pound plan, the opinion survey shows a country split in two on the issue. It also indicates growing public concern at the encroachment of the so-called "surveillance society", with large proportions suspicious of the Government's intentions.

While people appear to accept measures like CCTV cameras, which they believe help tackle specific problems like crime, they increasingly resent the rapid expansion of databases collecting information about everybody.

Overwhelmingly, the public is unwilling to trust Government promises not to misuse personal information and fears the national ID database will contain inaccurate and unreliable information about them.

Although half of those questioned said they still support the idea of national identity cards, this represents a big fall from the 80 per cent backing claimed by ministers a few years ago.

Many still do not associate the card with the national ID database that will accompany it. When pressed, a majority were unhappy that their personal details were to be recorded and worried that inaccurate information could cause them harm, denying access to services or jobs.

Most worrying for the Government is that a large proportion of those interviewed would accept a penalty rather than be registered. Half those opposed to the ID scheme would pay a fine or risk prison by refusing to hand over their details. Fifteen per cent said they would go to prison.

Even if a large proportion of these "refuseniks" eventually fell into line, the potential exists for a huge popular backlash. If just two in every 100 person over 16 refused to sign up, the Goverment would be pursuing one million people.

The ID Card Act deliberately did not make refusal to register a criminal offence punishable by imprisonment because ministers wanted to avoid the creation of "ID martyrs". The main penalties are a £2,500 fine for not registering and a £1,000 fine for failing to inform the authorities of a change of address. However, if people decline to pay their fines, the prospect then arises of going to prison.

The Act also does not make it a requirement to carry an ID card, again to avoid the so-called "Clarence Willcock effect", named after the last person to be prosecuted for refusing to show his wartime ID cards in 1952, leading to their abolition.

People will either have to produce a card at a police station if required or will simply have their biometrics, which will be stored on the national database, checked by special readers.

The poll is the first major test of opinion since Tony Blair sought to revive public interest in the ID scheme last month. Writing in The Daily Telegraph, he said: "We can't ignore the advances in biometric technology in a world in which protection and proof of identity are more important than ever. . . it will enable us to cut delays, improve access and make secure a whole array of services by giving certainty in asserting our identity and simplicity in verifying it."

However, the YouGov poll shows that many people, aware of the Government's poor record on IT, do not believe this. Substantial numbers think the database will contain inaccurate and unreliable information. Two thirds said they did not trust the government to keep the information confidential despite safeguards built into the legislation.

Support for the ID cards was strongest among Labour voters and weakest among Tories and Liberal Democrats, whose parties have said they would scrap the scheme.

There is also compelling evidence that Mr Blair is wrong to assert that there is no civil liberties issue at stake, merely an argument about cost and practicality. Of those unhappy with the database, 70 per cent object in principle.

Phil Booth, national co-ordinator of the NO2ID campaign group, said the survey confirmed a continuing decline in support for the ID scheme that would grow when people saw the costs involved and had to submit to giving their biometrics by visiting one of a network of ID centres being set up across the country.

"From next year, people as young as 16 applying for their first adult passport will have to attend their nearest centre where they will be subject to background checks, questioning to test their story against official records, photographs, and, before long, fingerprinting," Mr Booth said. "When that starts happening, public support will slide away even more. The vast majority of people do not want to be treated like numbers or common criminals."

Image

Note the speed camera acceptability reply: 50% for and 39% against. This almost certainly includes 35% or so of non-drivers, who have no reason whatsoever to doubt the official propaganda.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 04, 2006 20:05 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 23:26
Posts: 9268
Location: Treacletown ( just north of M6 J3),A MILE OR TWO PAST BEDROCK
[quote]While people appear to accept measures like CCTV cameras, which they believe help tackle specific problems like crime,-[quote]

Unlike what the figures say about the "Survellance society" --79% say it's true.

The survellance is only usefull if it's acted on at the time


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Mon Dec 04, 2006 22:27 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 04:10
Posts: 3244
botach wrote:
The survellance is only usefull if it's acted on at the time


No, all information is useful. The information gained AT THE TIME of recording is useful for the "stated" purpose of reducing crime and anti-social behaviour. But information on the recording/s may be useful for other purposes AT A LATER DATE. With facial recognition systems it may well be possible (almost certainly) to establish a complete report of a persons comings-and-goings over a period of time..along with other people who he/she meets along the way. The cctv system in my town can follow an individual through the town centre, each video surveillance unit passes the suspect along to the next. Along with ANPR. Which, by the way, will also soon be a feature of most town CCTV systems (it is in London already)


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 00:05 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2006 00:42
Posts: 832
Quote:
Overwhelmingly, the public is unwilling to trust Government promises not to misuse personal information and fears the national ID database will contain inaccurate and unreliable information about them.

All too true !!

It would now seem the surveillance and data recording in this country is worse than in Russia, and we are told this is a free country. Who are they kidding. 1984 has just arrived a few years latter than H G Wells expected, but he was not that far out, given the uncertainty in such predictions.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 08:20 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 19:50
Posts: 3369
Location: Lost in the Wilderness
Dr L wrote:
Quote:
Overwhelmingly, the public is unwilling to trust Government promises not to misuse personal information and fears the national ID database will contain inaccurate and unreliable information about them.

All too true !!

It would now seem the surveillance and data recording in this country is worse than in Russia, and we are told this is a free country. Who are they kidding. 1984 has just arrived a few years latter than H G Wells expected, but he was not that far out, given the uncertainty in such predictions.


My only comment is, it's about time the people of this country stood up to this government and at the same time send out a message to any future government :x .

_________________
Useless laws weaken necessary laws.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: ID Cards
PostPosted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 12:46 
Offline
New User
New User

Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2006 17:21
Posts: 4
Politicians only feel vulnerable when it comes to the ballot box. If we don't want ID cards then the only way forward is to make sure our MPs know that support for them is a vote losing action.
The only way we can make MPs know this is to write to them. If only 1 in 10 of the 70% of voters who say they are unhappy with the scheme wrote to their MP this would be about 3 million letters or about 5 thousand letters per MP.
Can we do it???


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 22:24 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 23:26
Posts: 9268
Location: Treacletown ( just north of M6 J3),A MILE OR TWO PAST BEDROCK
jomukuk wrote:
botach wrote:
The survellance is only usefull if it's acted on at the time


No, all information is useful. The information gained AT THE TIME of recording is useful for the "stated" purpose of reducing crime and anti-social behaviour. But information on the recording/s may be useful for other purposes AT A LATER DATE. With facial recognition systems it may well be possible (almost certainly) to establish a complete report of a persons comings-and-goings over a period of time..along with other people who he/she meets along the way. The cctv system in my town can follow an individual through the town centre, each video surveillance unit passes the suspect along to the next. Along with ANPR. Which, by the way, will also soon be a feature of most town CCTV systems (it is in London already)




ENTER STAGE RIGHT ANOTHER BLAIR CONVERT.

1) What is preferable - prevention of crime or conviction of a murderer ??
2) Facial recognition - with hoods/hats/caps , not to mention burpas /veils etc.
3)Folow a suspect - all they've got to do is to duck out of sight , take off their top, remain hooded and let yuo prove that it's them - and where is you're reasonable dought ?
4) Facial recognition systems - why not a number tatooed on our forehead , or a chip implanted - get real .
5) Record of persons coming and goings - Like as in ORWELL 1984????


Wake up man - the only way to prove it's them is to use CCTV to get a POLICE CONSTABLE to the scene to pick up suspect before he moves on and gives highly paid soliciter evidence to take more money from the state.


Unless you think that we should all be recorded at all times of the day - enter stage right 1984.
OR britain 2006, copyright blair/brown /prescott. :roll:


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 22:39 
Offline
User

Joined: Thu Jun 10, 2004 18:58
Posts: 306
Location: LanCA$Hire ex Kendal
1984 has just arrived a few years latter than H G Wells expected, but he was not that far out, given the uncertainty in such predictions.



1984 was George Orwell wasnt it :roll: Bizarre though that Orwell's real surname was......BLAIR :lol: :lol:

_________________
That's how Nazi Germany started. They'll be burning books next. (Brian Noble, Wigan coach - updated 20/4/06!!).


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 22:53 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2004 23:26
Posts: 9268
Location: Treacletown ( just north of M6 J3),A MILE OR TWO PAST BEDROCK
And how to defeat CCTV- get a hood/ balaclava/ woolie hat etc.I like a comment from a WPC on a local villian - "short hair - oh yes , his soliciter probably advised him to get it cut" ---need i say more.
Defeat a road camera - get funny plates

Similarity is obvious. ----except to those in power .


Would some power the gift he give us - to see the getouts as other see them ( apologies to Rab Burns)


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 10:48 
Offline
User

Joined: Fri Apr 08, 2005 16:12
Posts: 1040
Location: West Midlands
Whether they will do any good or not I don't know, but there is an anti ID Card petition in the same place as the anti road charging petition - http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/IDcards/.

Given that the message is supposed to go to Blair, then it is a certainty that they won't do any good (remember the anti-war protest), but at least something goes on record.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 11:41 
Offline
Site Admin
User avatar

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 06:46
Posts: 16903
Location: Safe Speed
Rewolf wrote:
Given that the message is supposed to go to Blair, then it is a certainty that they won't do any good (remember the anti-war protest), but at least something goes on record.


With the petition software currently in beta, don't be surprised if some inconvenient petitions vanish.

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 15:30 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Sat Mar 06, 2004 16:34
Posts: 923
Location: UK
I was sceptical about the project, but it is independently run by mySociety, the people behind www.theyworkforyou.com , FaxYourMP etc.

I still think it is overall a bit pointless though, it's like them saying "well we don't take any notice of petitions anyway, so we might as well make it easier for you because we're going to ignore it anyway"

Gareth


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 17:56 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed Dec 08, 2004 14:26
Posts: 4364
Location: Hampshire/Wiltshire Border
Petitions are to make you (the public) feel better. They have absolutely no effect on politicians and you are wasting your time creating or signing them.

Mr Cynical

a.k.a. Malcolm

_________________
Malcolm W.
The views expressed in this post are personal opinions and do not represent the views of Safespeed.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 18:03 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 11:19
Posts: 1795
The ballot box doesn't always change things as most of the three main parties are identical. The smaller parties haven't got a hope in hell which is probably why such numbers of people no longer bother voting. Different badge, same old crap. The real ones behind all this are the businessmen buying off the parties, councils and civil servants who are empire building. Until the whole lot are removed and replaced then I can't see how things will change much.

I think it might be worth starting a 'none of the above' party which I think would probably get a landslide!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject: !
PostPosted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 20:55 
Offline
User

Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2006 04:10
Posts: 3244
What evidence is there that democracy even exists ?
They all lie before the election, they all lie after the election and inbetween elections they all lie as well.

We pay a fortune in car taxes to finance a bunch of clowns who don't know a car from a cash machine, and a fortune in council tax to finance local empire building and salaries of public servants who don't serve, anyone.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2006 00:03 
Offline
User

Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2006 00:51
Posts: 160
and another point to bear in mind is, if the Government are supposed to serve US, why is it not US watching them instead of them watching us?

think about it!

_________________
Welcome to the UK, the Land of "Selective Freedoms"


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 07, 2006 12:26 
Offline
New User
New User

Joined: Fri Nov 24, 2006 17:21
Posts: 4
Sorry but I can't agree totally with MalcolmW.

Petitions do have a value in that they indicate to MPs which way the voters are thinking. MPs seldom think of what is best, they think in terms of what is popular and we can use letters to MPs and petitions to help them in the right direction!

Perhaps not the best way of getting things done but we do need to use MPs' weaknesses to our advantage!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 17 posts ] 

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 697 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.103s | 13 Queries | GZIP : Off ]