ID cards - will you or won't you?

[demon_x_slash]

The Database is creeping closer - will you fold or fight?

 

Citizens will face fine rather than sign up to ID card register | OUT-LAW.COM

 

Hundreds of thousands of people will refuse to sign up to the UK Government's planned identity register, according to just-published research. Around 8% of those surveyed said they would refuse to sign up to the database even if they are fined.

 

The survey was carried out by polling firm YouGov on behalf of the Daily Telegraph newspaper and in a sample of 1,979 people found that a significant proportion were prepared to defy the government over the database.

Of the 39% of the people who opposed the identity register, 21% said that they would resist signing up, even if it meant paying a small fine. That figure is 8% of the total.

If the figures are extrapolated to the entire UK population of 60 million people they mean that 23.4 million people would oppose the database and 4.8 million would be prepared to face a fine for resisting signing up. If just 2% of the country's over 16s refused to register then the Government would face a one million person revolt, the Telegraph said.

The survey found that 52% of people are unhappy at their details being kept on a database, and that the biggest concern was that people could access the information who were not entitled to see it.

Of those 52% of people, 77% said that they believed unauthorised personnel would see the information, while 71% said that the system could contain harmful errors about them.

The national identity register will be the main database for the Government's proposed ID cards. The register will contain identifying biometric data.

Though residents will not be required to carry the ID card at all times, OUT-LAW revealed last week that the ID card legislation allows the mobile fingerprint scanners that police are currently testing to access that database. That means that if police are given the go-ahead for mobile fingerprint machines that someone's identity can be checked immediately on the street against the database.

The Telegraph survey showed that there were high levels of approval for many of the kinds of surveillance that are on the increase in the UK. CCTV cameras in high streets were approved of by 85% of people, photographing airline passengers by 72%. Maintaining DNA material on a national database had an approval rating of just 37%.

The Information Commissioner Richard Thomas has repeatedly warned that the UK is becoming a surveillance society without any real public debate about the process or its consequences.

"Two years ago I warned that we were in danger of sleepwalking into a surveillance society," Thomas said in November. "Today I fear that we are in fact waking up to a surveillance society that is already all around us."

Despite 79% of the people surveyed saying that they thought that the UK was a surveillance society, 62% of them said that the did not feel that they were spied upon.

[Guest Battleaxe]

Fight!!! they have my national Insurance number, passport number, drivers license, my permanaent resident visa number I think my finger prints are with Mr Plod after our burglary and they have thumb prints at immigration, NHS number. They have enough of me stored everywhere.

[demon_x_slash]

NO2ID:stop ID cards and the database state

 

NO2ID:why not?

[Guest Battleaxe]

Opt out letters already sent regarding NHS Data Base

[Guest ian cognito]

Why not? my personal data is already scattered all over the planet in various databases, most of it probably wrong so where's the harm in yet another incorrect entry, if we're really lucky they may get it right!

 

OK so the NHS database hasn't quite gone according to plan but my Dr's has my records on computer, as does the hospital, probably along with a few others, so them sharing the data isn't a problem, if anyone wants to hack in and check my blood pressure level I don't have a problem with that, no more of a security risk than my bank already is.

 

Serveillance society? does anybody think we don't need one?

[demon_x_slash]

My precise thoughts on this matter (ok, rambling, but there ye go ) here:

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/nhs/53364-opting-out-new-nhs.html#post462045

 

in the thread about opting out of the NHS Spine Database.

[Guest Battleaxe]

ID cards one thing, NHS data base another.

 

ID cards do not stop terrorism as aoriginally mooted.

 

NHS Data Base, incorrect data can cause wrong treatment and all sorts of other complications. Try explaining Pink Disease to a brand new overseas doctor. Try explaiing it to a new doctor at all. Just as an example but if they get this wrong, what else can they get wrong.

 

I am married to another man who lives in Northhampton according to my NHS records.

 

According to my husbands records I live somewhere else with a completely different phone number, this is why they could not get in touch with me in an emergency. I spotted the error when MOTH had to see Consultant while I was glancing through his file. Oh they also gave MOTH the wrong grading of his tumour, it was another man by the same name, which could have resulted in the wrong type of treatment and they were adamant that their records were correct. good thing I had copies of all, the reports to prove this life threatening mistake. We had to push to get that sorted now the Health Commission are investigating this near fatal mistake.

[Guest ian cognito]

I appreciate all that Battleaxe, but surely a database networked to your own GP would be more reliable than odd bits of info here there and everywhere? assuming you had the right to chack and verify data held, it would be far easier to maintain?

[demon_x_slash]

The problem, janquinny, is that it won't just be your GP able to look at your information:

 

From The Big Opt-Out:

The Personal Demographic Service will be available to all NHS employees, including high street pharmacies. It will let NHS employees trawl 50 patients at a time using variations on your name, surname, address and date of birth to try to find the correct patient. Hence any NHS employee could find anyone purely by claiming to have legitimately called up the wrong patient details. Added to this, if they work in A&E they will be able to access clinical information—including the information in “sealed envelopes” that have been put there by the patient or doctor to protect the patient’s confidentiality.

Additionally high street pharmacists are arguing that they should not only be able to access your name, address, ex-directory phone number and GP details on the Personal Demographics Service but that they should also be able to access your ‘Summary Care Record’—as well as edit or amend it, and add medical and clinical details to it.

...includes pharmacists, ambulance staff, District Nurses, staff in community clinics such as Family Planning Clinics, Sexual Health Clinics, hospital staff including nursing staff, physiotherapists, occupational therapists, dieticians, mental health teams… and anyone else the NHS thinks may find your information useful.

Anything you disclose to any doctor, nurse, midwife, health visitor, health professional, NHS employee, pharmacist, at any hospital, surgery or clinic will be stored on this massive central government database. This could include sensitive issues such as sexuality, ethnicity, genetics, mental health issues, illicit drug use, abortion, contraception, impotence, paternity, infertility, HIV, sexually transmitted diseases, infidelitity, personal relationships, emotional problems, test results, domestic violence, rape and sexual abuse.

All of this highly personal information would also then be used for ’secondary purposes’, as detailed in Hidden uses of medical records.

[demon_x_slash]

Hidden uses: The Big Opt Out » Hidden uses of medical records

 

Every time you attend a hospital as either an outpatient, inpatient or an A&E attendence, all your personal and clinical details are sent to a private company McKesson in Warwick without your consent. Even sensitive procedures such as abortions/terminations are sent to this private company, McKesson.

Your personal and clinical details include your postcode, date of birth, NHS number, GP details, consultant details, hospital, clinic your attended, procedure/operation, when you were admitted to hospital, the date of your discharge and whether you will be seen at the hospital again. As there are only 3 or 4 addresses to a postcode, with a date of birth it is easy to identify someone. See ‘Helen’s story‘ for further information.

[demon_x_slash]

Helen's Story: The Big Opt Out » Helen's Story

[demon_x_slash]

This was in 2003. How far along the line have we come since then?

 

Extract:

 

Milburn scraps right to amend health records

 

David Hencke, Westminster correspondent

Tuesday February 25, 2003

Guardian

Alan Milburn, the health secretary, has reneged on a government pledge to allow NHS patients the right to correct inaccurate facts or opinions held on their medical records.

 

The Department of Health is also discussing in secret plans to increase charges, originally set at a maximum of £10, to £50 or more for people to see their records. A plan to allow people "fast track" access to their records in 21 rather than 40 days has also been dropped.

The department's action - which flies in the face of the government's commitment to open government - is to be raised today at a meeting of the advisory committee on implementing the freedom of information act, set up by Lord Irvine, the lord chancellor, to monitor developments in Whitehall.

Details of the u-turn in policy have emerged after the Campaign for Freedom of Information pressure group obtained new Department of Health guidance advising health authorities and GP practices what information should be available to patients under the Data Protection Act. The advice ignores pledges by Home Office ministers to allow patients to be able to add notes to their records, correcting false facts or opinions, and for a fast track service.

[Stillborn Crisps]

Why not? my personal data is already scattered all over the planet in various databases, most of it probably wrong so where's the harm in yet another incorrect entry, if we're really lucky they may get it right!

 

Coz under the proposals this one's gonna cost you an estimated £93, which you eventually will have no opt-out of and will be law enforceable.

[Guest ian cognito]

No still not convinced, I trust these people with my life, it would be silly not to trust them with my personal data.

 

Lets look at the flip side of this coin, imagine I am a psychopath (ok wouldn't take much imagination) and i decide “the holding, storing and processing of my personal and clinical details is likely to cause [me] substantial and unwarranted distress” so I insist it be removed, then I move in next door to you.......?

 

Going back to ID cards, no they won't prevent terrorism but may go some way towards cracking petty crimes, benefit fraud etc. set against the fact that my records generally are available to lots of employees of lots of private comapnies (CRA's to mention 3) I think the advantages still outweigh the disadvantages.

[buzby]

No still not convinced, I trust these people with my life, it would be silly not to trust them with my personal data..

 

Sadly I don't. I still retain the right of veto if I disagree with their diagnosis and can seek a second opinion that may conflict with the original one. Therefore, I most certainly wouldn't trust them with my data in the same way I hold the CRA and their feeder clients in utter contrempt.

 

My local doctor's surgery and it's database is one thing, opening this up to the NHS Spine is quite another. I've opted out, and I urge ALL CAG members to read the abuse possibilities in the links above, and decide accordingly.

[demon_x_slash]

Thank you, buzby. Now, for an example, the vagueness of one section of the ID Cards Act 2006 - the section dealing with providing your information to third parties without the data subject's (YOUR) counsent.

 

 

Identity Cards Act 2006

 

Director-General of the Security Service - and any subordinate

Chief of the Secret Intelligence Service - and any subordinate

Director of the Government Communications Headquarters - and any subordinate

Director General of the Serious Organised Crime Agency - and any subordinate

Commissioners for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs - and any subordinate - "(d) for the purpose of facilitating the checking of information provided to the Commissioners in connection with anything under their care and management, or with any other matter in relation to which the Commissioners have duties under any enactment"

 

5) The provision of information not falling within paragraph 9 of Schedule 1 is authorised by this section where the information is provided-

(a) to a prescribed government department, or

(b) to a prescribed Northern Ireland department

for purposes connected with the carrying out of any prescribed functions of that department or of a Minister in charge of it.

(1) In a case where there is no authorisation under sections 17 to 19 for the provision of information, the Secretary of State may nevertheless, without the individual's consent, provide a public authority with information recorded in an individual's entry in the Register if-

(a) the information is not information falling within paragraph 9 of Schedule 1;
(b) the information is of a description specified or described in an order made by the Secretary of State;
© the information is provided to a public authority so specified or described;
(d) the information is provided for the purposes so specified or described; and
(e) there is compliance with any requirements imposed by or under section 21 in relation to the provision of the information.

[breadline]

I appreciate all that Battleaxe, but surely a database networked to your own GP would be more reliable than odd bits of info here there and everywhere? assuming you had the right to chack and verify data held, it would be far easier to maintain?

 

I have a lot of illness on the A&E computer that is not known to my GP, recently having a medical it was only my gp's records that where taken into account, there where no registered falls (3 x in a week) resulting in a broken foot.

There was no notes regarding the dizziness which was part of a neurological infection, I left A&E one morning having the plaster removed from my foot and 50 minutes later attended a prebooked neurologist, who even though in the same building never had my notes form the previous 3 weeks visits to A&E.

If the GP's and the neurologist and the A&E where linked I would not have spent months with no treatment laid on my settee while my body shut down.

 

I was given a prescription drug by A&E and this was also not on my GP's notes. How persons who are not of sound mind cope i do not know, at least i was able to pass some information across, i could have been been on 2 courses of treatment that disagreed with each other and no one would have been the wiser.

 

So for these reasons I feel it would be easier to provide better health care and also monitor people who are a danger in society to them selves and to others.

 

However also after receiving neglect and ignorance in huge dosages and now supporting my illness by means other than the NHS I certainly dont trust them with my life, as they nearly killed me.

But hell unless you win the lottery there isn't an alternative around the corner.

[Guest Battleaxe]

I have a lot of illness on the A&E computer that is not known to my GP, recently having a medical it was only my gp's records that where taken into account, there where no registered falls (3 x in a week) resulting in a broken foot.

There was no notes regarding the dizziness which was part of a neurological infection, I left A&E one morning having the plaster removed from my foot and 50 minutes later attended a prebooked neurologist, who even though in the same building never had my notes form the previous 3 weeks visits to A&E.

If the GP's and the neurologist and the A&E where linked I would not have spent months with no treatment laid on my settee while my body shut down.

 

Unless the treatment notes are typed directly on to the patients record at the time of treatment, there will be NO cohesion in the system. Picture your consultant typing up the notes immediately after seeing you, so the central database is up to date. this just wont happen. it will still be the same thing, the notes will have to be typed by the secretary and then loaded onto the data base after editing to make sure she/he has transcribed correctly before this records can be updated. When you are seen at A & E, it is the handwritten notes by whoever ses regarding treatment and these then have to go to the central records office to be added to your file, this is why your neurologist never knew about the treatment you had that day or even in the previous three weeks. it can take over a month for some records to be added to a patiernts file. I always take a note book with me and write everything down. kent has cancer, so this important that every detail is kept somewhere, in my living room and I harass the secretaries to send me copies of everything, so I have a complete file ready for Kent if he needs emergency admission. this also stood me in good stead when things went belly up regarding his treatment initially. I had the lot, the MRI, bone scans, chest xrays and pathology reports. they have to give them to you, this is done on CD now and I can view on my computer at home.

 

You are right, those people who are not competent must really be at a loss. they trust the medical profession and they are most vulnerable.

[JimmyTheOne]

Why would anyone who uses the following method of ID Theft Protection need and ID card.

 

Why fork out a small fortune with for an ill thought out government ploy when citizens can protect themselves form ID theft if they so wish.

 

Details from Scams Direct below:

 

Thumbstruck.

 

“This is an excellent idea. It offers people effective protection

against fraud.”

 

MP Demands Action.

 

Here's How.

 

No databases!

 

Have your unique biometric to protect you 24/7

 

Force crooks into showing their hand if they wish to steal your ID.

 

Put it to your local MP: Why would I need an ID card when I use this system? It costs next to nothing.

[LJL]

I happen to think that ID cards are a good idea, it should'nt give honest law abiding folk any sleepness nights, yet allow the authorities to highlight any criminals or less honest people more easily.

 

I have the same view on CCTV/ANPR etc, if you have nothing to hide then there shouldnt be a problem.

 

Dont get me wrong, I can think of many things wrong in this country, but as a young male who is also a father, I want my son growing up in the safest environment possible...

[buzby]

The only reason you think it is a good idea, is because you do not appreciate how fragile this 'trust' is, and once your personal data has become completely compromised (DoB, full names, Place of Birth, mothers maiden name, NI number) and you really have nothing 'private' left - your identity loss is the equivalent of rape. You have been completely violated for someone elses ends. You don't matter, but your ability to facilitate a fraud without your knowledge becomes an issue.

 

You will have to fight twice as hard to prove your innocence, as despite your protestations, how could all your personal details become known so easily? It has started with Chip & PIN, where the banks now assert that you used the card because your 4-digit PIN was used. It doesn;t matter you were in Teneriffe at the time, you must have told someone, so it's your fault.

 

Sorry, that nonsense is not for me. The less people know, the safer I am.

[Guest Battleaxe]

Funny thing about our identity theft, no-one knew my mother's maiden name and this is how I was able to prove it wasn't me. The name they used was not her maiden name, Yet they were still able to get away with it. The other thing which helped, was having been married three times they didn't know the first husband's surname. The bank will still not tell me how it happened.

[omicron]

Already got one, it cost me thirty-odd quid and lets me drive anything up to 3.5 tonnes as well, why do I need another?

[Guest Battleaxe]

If T Blair gets his way you will

[buzby]

Well, there's a question. Will the electorate be silly enough? We're in the same picture the tories were in, and Labour came from nowhere to triumph. Forgetting for the moment the Gordon Brown is being feted by his supporters as the next PM, he may never win an election to stay in office.

 

It's also intreresting to note that the Scottish Parliament has already said ID cards will not be compulsory, however, they fail to say that we'll be exempt from having to get one as part of out 'UK' passport, which is one of the reasons the SNP is doing so well in the opinion polls. Juslt like Ulster, England has every right to do its own thing and not become involved in floating the costs of other administrations, so these 'united approach' ideas may be dead in the water, but for reasons not directly connected with them.