Identity

[godricgal]

I know I am not alone when I say that I am wary of the direction western democracy is taking at the moment. I know that I am a minority when I express to what extent this scares me and to where I believe the UK government is heading. I have always considered myself a Conservative, you will not be surprised to discover that so have my parents. Most Conservative supporters of my ages, slightly older or younger have inherited their beliefs from their parents. Until about 5 years ago, I think my views were heavily influenced by my parents, I never supported Tony Blair, or his new-fangled Labour party, largely because I thought he was a smarmy git and what the hell are we doing with a lefty government?! Time, experience, or perhaps even wisdom, have reinforced that Tony Blair is indeed a Bad Man and his cabinet are no better (but that is the subject of a later post).

There are dymanics on the domestic and international political stages right now that down right terrify me. I couldn't possibly cover or explain everything in one post. This is the first in a series of posts that will attempt to explain my views to readers, but also to a certain extent, to myself.

Domestically, my principal concern at the moment is the ID Cards Bill. Identity management is big at the moment, it has to be. The internet has changed the way we represent ourselves, and really that what identity management is all about. For example, I am Godricgal, a stupid username that I hate, but chose in 5 minutes one night when I needed an identitiy to represent myself to HP fandom. I registered the Hotmail address, using a fake name and a previous post code, I got myself a FFN account and later an LJ under the same circumstances. And here I am. Probably not well known in HP fandom, but certainly known and it doesn't matter that I don't use my real name because my screen name is enough to identify me under for the necessary purposes. If however, I want to purchase something from Amazon, or obtain an insurance quote, I need to give my real name, my real address etc. My point is; identity is subjective.

On an individual to individual basis (my screen name to yours, for example) I can be how ever I want to be, no proof is required because proof doesn't really matter. When it comes to corporate to individual, (buying something online,lets say) the tables turn , I need an identity that is linked to who I really am because I am entering into a legal contract. I have to tell them who I am, largely in order for them to verify that the money they will be taking is mine to offer in exchange for what ever goods I am buying. Then there are organisations such as banks where I need to prove categorically who I am. Banks are guided by legislation and are obligated to link existence with identity.

I'm going to stop here with identity because it is a concept rather than a 'thing' and there are many opinions about what it consists of.

The ID Cards Bill worries me because it aims to tie a person down to a single identity. Not a bad thing, you might say. Rather than a Barclays Bank account number, a credit card number, an Oyster card number, a passport number or a driving licence number, you would have one single number that identified you every where, great! Except that what the UK government is proposing is that you have one number that identifies you every where. One number that links to your childhood social services record, your education record, your CRB record, your bank accounts, your Oyster card, your health records, your bank records. One number that links to everything about you, along with your previous addresses for the last six years, which banks you have visited, when and how much money you withdrew, transferred or payed in, when you have visited a hospital or a doctor. And that doesn't say what they could do with the proposed ID card, that says what they will do! Originally referred to as an entitlement card, one that you would have to present in order to access public services; it quickly changed to an ID card post September the 11th, when it was billed (pardon the pun) as a preventative measure against terrorism. Well Spain has ID cards and that didn't prevent the Madrid bombings and no one expected them to. They can't possibly, a fact that was highlighted by the fact that (I may be wrong here) but only one of the London Bombers was a foreign national, and even in his case how would the rest of us having ID cards have identified that one guy as a terrorist? Money laundering, housing act, FSA; yeah, yeah yeah. Do you really think it would have stopped the bombing? No. And neither do the government. For long ago they abandoned that pretext and swiftly moved on to the hot topic of Identity Theft.

Identity Theft. What is it? The theft of identity. So if some one else decided to call themselves 'Godricgal' in HP fandom, is that identity theft? Yes, in some ways it is, because people will think it is me. A problem? Perhaps, if some one is going about talking shit in my 'name' perhaps (but I do enough of that myself!). Some one using my credit card? Ha! and here's were we hit a problem, because I don't think that it is. If some one steals my credit card and uses it, well, until we had chip and pin, it was simply some one who had stolen my card and forged my signature and now it is some one who has stolen my credit card and looked over my shoulder as I used my PIN. Identity theft, at is most destructive is some one who has taken on a legal identity using something like a birth certificate, to obtain a document such as a passport or driving licence to perpetuate themselves under a different, legal name. Meaning that if I were able to obtain some ones (or several some one) elses birth certificate, I could (under the bill) gain several, unfaliable identity documents. But I have digressed. What the government actually want from the ID Cards Bill is not ID cards, it's the database that goes with it, the so called NIR. I think they proved this 9 or so months ago when they announced plans for the National Childrens Register, a database to track the health, social services and education records of all children (meaning that in 16 years time they would start to have a complete record of all new adults in the country. Don't think this is unintentional. A disjointed as government IDs maybe now, once the NIR is in place, it'll be all one thing.

Scary, scary scary...tbc a real life fic!

Comments please, I am trying to reconcile my own views!

Comments

[gijane7702.livejournal.com]

The same thing was suggested here right after 9-11, but was quickly shot down. Due to, basically, the same reasons that you posted.

I think we sould have some sort of national id, but not anything thats so tied up to you personally.

I have no idea...if you require me to get a national id, fine. If not, oh well! That's what my social security number, DL, passport, CAC card, ect is for!!

~C

[patriot-jackie.livejournal.com]

Well, I'm in favor of a national ID card, but certainly not to the extent that you're talking about.

Especially in light of the illegal immigration issues that we've been having as of late (meaning these stupid protests), National ID cards have been brought to the fore once again. The problem is that you can acquire the forms of identification we currently use (Driver's License, SSN cards for instance) WAY WAY WAY too easily.

Do you know how many multiple Drivers Licenses the 9/11 terrorists had? I've forgotten the exact number, but it was incredible.

Of course, whatever is done concerning National ID cards, they need to be more secure than any other form of identification.

[godricgal.livejournal.com]

Well, yes. On principal, I'm in favour on a national ID card scheme too. What the British government is proposing however is a national surveilance scheme! I will explain what I mean in later posts. But I would not be against a scheme like that of the German's (apart from the being obliged to carry the card with you everywhere, which I am totally against). The Germans have an ID card and all their info is held within the card. What is not done and what is the aim of the ID card here is the database. Germans apply for their card, it is issued and their info is deleted from all government databases. In the UK, when the legislation comes into force, we will be issues with our card, that will double up as a driving licence and passport but there will be a database that cataloges each time we use it. The more instances the public or private sector are invented the more our lives are on record.
There is a quote that I will dig up in the next few days that, for me, epitomises the aim of the ID card, look out for it, if you are interested.

[godricgal.livejournal.com]

Of course, whatever is done concerning National ID cards, they need to be more secure than any other form of identification.

You have hit the nail on the head here, because how do you do that??? It's not easy. Our ID card will contain 13 pieces of biometric data (10 finger prints, 2 iris scans and a photo) but a good percentage of the population do not have readable fingerprints, and all are liable to change. The ID Cards Bill makes a criminal offence of not informing the Government of any changes to biometric data. This means that the second Granny comes out of an operation to remove cataracts, she is a criminal! The statistics for false positives on fingerprint scans are not good (1 in 100,000). The Bill doesn't provide the power for the police to trawl the NIR for a fingerprint match, but how long will it be before they start clamoring for the power to do that?
What the ID cards come down to, in their essence is tying legal identity down to a single number and this is dangerous.