UK's Blair Dismisses Online Anti ID-Card Petition 377
An anonymous reader writes "Prime Minister Tony Blair has responded personally via email to 28,000 online petitioners opposing the UK's planned identity card scheme, and has closed the online petition. The email reads: 'We live in a world in which people, money and information are more mobile than ever before. Terrorists and international criminal gangs increasingly exploit this to move undetected across borders and to disappear within countries. Terrorists routinely use multiple identities — up to 50 at a time... ID cards which contain biometric recognition details and which are linked to a National Identity Register will make this much more difficult.'"
Better link (Score:5, Informative)
Tony Blair closes online petition? (Score:5, Informative)
There was a deadline for signatures and it has passed. Blair has responded to the petitioners after the petition was complete. That sounds more like he was pissed of with it and closed the petition. The fact that the prime minister personally closed the petition was the item in this story that pissed me off the most and that wasn't even true.
There's plenty we can moan at Blair for without making things up.
Closing the petition (Score:5, Informative)
The response since it's been requested (Score:2, Informative)
The e-petition to "scrap the proposed introduction of ID cards" has now closed. The petition stated that "The introduction of ID cards will not prevent terrorism or crime, as is claimed. It will be yet another indirect tax on all law-abiding citizens of the UK". This is a response from the Prime Minister, Tony Blair.
The petition calling for the Government to abandon plans for a National ID Scheme attracted almost 28,000 signatures - one of the largest responses since this e-petition service was set up. So I thought I would reply personally to those who signed up, to explain why the Government believes National ID cards, and the National Identity Register needed to make them effective, will help make Britain a safer place.
The petition disputes the idea that ID cards will help reduce crime or terrorism. While I certainly accept that ID cards will not prevent all terrorist outrages or crime, I believe they will make an important contribution to making our borders more secure, countering fraud, and tackling international crime and terrorism. More importantly, this is also what our security services - who have the task of protecting this country - believe.
So I would like to explain why I think it would be foolish to ignore the opportunity to use biometrics such as fingerprints to secure our identities. I would also like to discuss some of the claims about costs - particularly the way the cost of an ID card is often inflated by including in estimates the cost of a biometric passport which, it seems certain, all those who want to travel abroad will soon need.
In contrast to these exaggerated figures, the real benefits for our country and its citizens from ID cards and the National Identity Register, which will contain less information on individuals than the data collected by the average store card, should be delivered for a cost of around £3 a year over its ten-year life.
But first, it's important to set out why we need to do more to secure our identities and how I believe ID cards will help. We live in a world in which people, money and information are more mobile than ever before. Terrorists and international criminal gangs increasingly exploit this to move undetected across borders and to disappear within countries. Terrorists routinely use multiple identities - up to 50 at a time. Indeed this is an essential part of the way they operate and is specifically taught at Al-Qaeda training camps. One in four criminals also uses a false identity. ID cards which contain biometric recognition details and which are linked to a National Identity Register will make this much more difficult.
Secure identities will also help us counter the fast-growing problem of identity fraud. This already costs £1.7 billion annually. There is no doubt that building yourself a new and false identity is all too easy at the moment. Forging an ID card and matching biometric record will be much harder.
I also believe that the National Identity Register will help police bring those guilty of serious crimes to justice. They will be able, for example, to compare the fingerprints found at the scene of some 900,000 unsolved crimes against the information held on the register. Another benefit from biometric technology will be to improve the flow of information between countries on the identity of offenders.
The National Identity Register will also help improve protection for the vulnerable, enabling more effective and quicker checks on those seeking to work, for example, with children. It should make it much more difficult, as has happened tragically in the past, for people to slip through the net.
Proper identity management and ID cards also have an important role to play in preventing illegal immigration and illegal working. The effectiveness on the new biometric technology is, in fact, already being seen. In trials using this technology on visa applications at just nine overseas posts, our officials have already uncovered 1,400 people trying illegally to get back into
Re:Better link (Score:5, Informative)
The e-petition to "scrap the proposed introduction of ID cards" has now closed. The petition stated that "The introduction of ID cards will not prevent terrorism or crime, as is claimed. It will be yet another indirect tax on all law-abiding citizens of the UK". This is a response from the Prime Minister, Tony Blair.
The petition calling for the Government to abandon plans for a National ID Scheme attracted almost 28,000 signatures - one of the largest responses since this e-petition service was set up. So I thought I would reply personally to those who signed up, to explain why the Government believes National ID cards, and the National Identity Register needed to make them effective, will help make Britain a safer place.
The petition disputes the idea that ID cards will help reduce crime or terrorism. While I certainly accept that ID cards will not prevent all terrorist outrages or crime, I believe they will make an important contribution to making our borders more secure, countering fraud, and tackling international crime and terrorism. More importantly, this is also what our security services - who have the task of protecting this country - believe.
So I would like to explain why I think it would be foolish to ignore the opportunity to use biometrics such as fingerprints to secure our identities. I would also like to discuss some of the claims about costs - particularly the way the cost of an ID card is often inflated by including in estimates the cost of a biometric passport which, it seems certain, all those who want to travel abroad will soon need.
In contrast to these exaggerated figures, the real benefits for our country and its citizens from ID cards and the National Identity Register, which will contain less information on individuals than the data collected by the average store card, should be delivered for a cost of around £3 a year over its ten-year life.
But first, it's important to set out why we need to do more to secure our identities and how I believe ID cards will help. We live in a world in which people, money and information are more mobile than ever before. Terrorists and international criminal gangs increasingly exploit this to move undetected across borders and to disappear within countries. Terrorists routinely use multiple identities - up to 50 at a time. Indeed this is an essential part of the way they operate and is specifically taught at Al-Qaeda training camps. One in four criminals also uses a false identity. ID cards which contain biometric recognition details and which are linked to a National Identity Register will make this much more difficult.
Secure identities will also help us counter the fast-growing problem of identity fraud. This already costs £1.7 billion annually. There is no doubt that building yourself a new and false identity is all too easy at the moment. Forging an ID card and matching biometric record will be much harder.
I also believe that the National Identity Register will help police bring those guilty of serious crimes to justice. They will be able, for example, to compare the fingerprints found at the scene of some 900,000 unsolved crimes against the information held on the register. Another benefit from biometric technology will be to improve the flow of information between countries on the identity of offenders.
The National Identity Register will also help improve protection for the vulnerable, enabling more effective and quicker checks on those seeking to work, for example, with children. It should make it much more difficult, as has happened tragically in the past, for people to slip through the net.
Proper identity management and ID cards also have an important role to play in preventing illegal immigration and illegal working. The effectiveness on the new biometric technology is, in fact, already being seen. In trials using this technology on visa applications at just nine overseas posts, our officials have already uncovered 1,400 pe
Re:The response since it's been requested (Score:3, Informative)
This was expected (Score:3, Informative)
Nothing surprising about this move. The petitions were only allowed for the same reason that public enquiries are allowed. They create an illusion of consultation, but because they usually come to the attention of only a few particularly interested people any opposition to the government view can be safely ignored. What the government failed to consider with online petitions are that they can be easily filled in by people once they have been informed of their existence by the same medium - the internet. This is why government sources described the person who came up wih the idea as an idiot last week (I'm not joking).
In this particular case the comnpanies that stand to make a fortune from government contracts to bring in the ID card are the same companies providing directorships to former ministers, MPs and civil servants. The so called "revolving door". As the right dishonourable Tony Blair MP is soon to be out of a job he's more than likely to go the extra mile to keep these companies happy. He needs a job after leaving office, as his mortgage commitments are astronomical (again, I'm not joking).
No2ID Saw This Coming (Score:5, Informative)
No2ID [no2id.net], the UK's leading campaign against the National Identity Card and the Database State, realised even before this petition was launched that the site exists only to encourage "fire and forget" activism from people. People signing up to No2ID are encouraged to subscribe to a fortnightly e-mail newsletter which keeps them up to date with the latest news on ID Cards in Government and across the country.
The No2ID campaign has encouraged a 30% swing in public opinion against Identity Cards, has encouraged councils and other organisations across the country to oppose the Government's plans, and formed a wide alliance of political parties and unions from all sides of the spectrum in opposition to this scheme. It's unlikely that the Tories would have come out against ID cards (albeit in a half-arsed way) without No2ID's influence.
If people want to make a difference, joining and supporting No2ID is the best way to do so. There are local groups nationwide, which can always benefit from more supporters.
Re:Hooray for democracy (Score:2, Informative)
Re:The response since it's been requested (Score:3, Informative)
Join No2ID.org (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Better link (Score:2, Informative)
A Slashdot member has kindly posted the link to the petition (something Slashdot should've done) which only list the number of voters, which as far as I can see closed because it expired (all votes on the pm.gov.uk have an expiry date) NOT because Tony Blair forcibly closed it. Another Slashdot member has posted this without any source link to backup what he posted.
Incidentally I have just found the relevant source link Slashdot should've posted in the first place (and pasted in here): http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page10987.asp [pm.gov.uk]
I'd always prefer to read the source link as I've no idea otherwise if it's true. Also: Homepage for ID Cards: http://www.pm.gov.uk/output/Page10960.asp [pm.gov.uk]. Next time Slashdot instead of posting such blatantly one sided news how about you also post your source links to back it up!
As for whether Tony Blair is good prime minister as I see some are commenting on that's a debate for an entirely different discussion, if you think Tony Blair solely is for ID Cards you're a fool.
Personally I think he's done a lot for the UK which is overshadowed by his recent Iraq war decisions. Tony Blair has been in power 10 years lets not forget and also lets not forget what a mess the Conservatives left the country in.
Some perspective please people.
Re:Here's a sample (Score:4, Informative)
From David Davies (Shadow Home Secretary) to Sir Gus O'Donnell (head of the Civil Service):
'I am writing to you in relation to the Government's planned roll out of its national identity card scheme, commencing this year. You will be aware that there is a longstanding convention that one Parliament may not bind a subsequent Parliament.As you will also be aware, the Conservative Party has stated publicly that it is our intention to cancel the ID cards project immediately on our being elected to government. You are now formally on notice of our position and fully appraised of the contingent risks and associated liabilities arising from the national identity card scheme.'
Re:So do we have any evidence. (Score:3, Informative)
Exactly my sentiments. If terrorism is a problem, where are the terrorists? Where are the endless terrorist attacks and counter-terrorist busts? We got bombed once [wikipedia.org] , like a year and a half ago. America hasn't been attacked at all in half a decade. Is that supposed to constitute a persistent looming threat? Because I, for one, could not care less.
Re:Better link (Score:3, Informative)
Hopefully soon those who got a small amount of tax credits to buy their vote (whilst they lost more from other taxes/increases) will come to their senses and vote for another party at the next election.
Re:Better link (Score:3, Informative)
As I said in my reply, a passport containing a digitised facial image is perfectly acceptable - see the US Embassy's own guidelines [usembassy.org.uk]. In particular, there is no need to have your fingerprints stored there.
Having an ID which everyone has is common in most countries
As far as I know, no other country has a centralised ID database on the scale of the planned UK National Identity Register. In particular, the database will store an audit trail of every time it's been accessed. If it becomes common (as you suggest) for ID to be checked whenever a credit card is used, this means that the government can track every purchase you make using one.
Regarding your comments on Andrew Gilligan - he appears to provide named and reputable sources in that article. What part of it aren't you convinced about?
Re:"Prime Minister' is not a title (Score:2, Informative)
Most (good) news media in the UK at least seem to refer to him as "the Prime Minister, Tony Blair" or "mr Blair" as you have suggested.
Caveat: this does not mean I like his policies of course.
Re:Is this a democracy? (Score:3, Informative)
Currently 25 signatures.