Apologies for my lack of input of late, travel demands of work !
Having had a catch up on the posts i have missed it is good to see that there has been:
1. A few more hits on his thread, which indicates additional interest on the subject matter. however, again this subject has some 14,000 hits, whereas take for example the thread on the A340 being damaged at Toulouse has had over a quarter of a million hits.
just goes to show that perhaps the majority interest is in reading about damage *after* it has occurred rather than preventing it in the first place.
2. Additional interest on the subject matter from a Unite union member and representation on the issue. However, what must be borne in mind is the points i made in my previous posts concerning union opposition (see posts #124 / #161 / #164 / #169 / #178 )
There have been aside from the above points some key issues that have been raised on the subject matter of the ID card scheme:
The European court of human rights found in favour of the plaintiff's in
S. and Marper v. the United Kingdom a breach of human rights in their DNA being retained without conviction.
While it is implied that no-one will be forced to hold an ID card, it is implicit that to gain airside access in order to undertake one's employment will require the issuance of an ID card.
Ergo, while you are not forced to have an ID card, you have to make the choice of an ID card or your job.
While the EUCHR has found a breach of human rights in the holding of biometric data without criminal conviction, the implication here is that the UK government is doubly countermanding your human rights by way of you having to accept your human rights being violated to retain your job.
A point here i would like to consider is that there is a requirement for a criminal conviction certificate to be provided in order to be issued with an airside pass. There is no specific requirement noted as to when the certificate is issued. That is to say, if i am already in possession of a CRB check certificate then that should be sufficient for the issuance of an airside pass.
You can go to any police station, pay the 5 pounds, or whatever it is right now, and have a CRB check done and be issued with a certificate confirming no conviction. This would then be acceptable for the issuance of an airside pass WITHOUT the ID card.
So already we have a loophole in that people that require airside access to perform the duties of their employment can obtain the requisite documentation to be issued with an airside pass without having a national ID card. !
While in Holland, someone has already created a system to record biometric data, this has also been achieved in the UK. The purchase of electronic components readily available in retail outlets enabling the reading of biometric data is available. See my previous post. The UK based trial resulted in the data being red from biometric passports from a range of up to 10 feet.
So, having this equipment in a bag and walking through an airport, where the vast majority of people will be holding passports, will enable the holder to gain a vast amount of passport biometric data in a short time.
Again, this reverts back to my previous post that while taking on the identity of another person has been around for centuries, the prospect becomes ever easier the more data on a person is stored at a single point. THIS IS WHY IDENTITY THEFT IS INCREASING EXPONENTIALLY.
And again, if a person is to engage in nefarious activities, they wont be using their identity to do so, they will be using yours.
As I pointed out in a previous post, the cost of the ID scheme has been pegged, by the government at 5.5 billion over 10 years. A cost of half a billion per year. We all know the government track record on project overspends.
The NHS IT system was a declared cost of
6.2 billion over 10 years. To date the anticipated cost is toward the
31 billion mark. This is for a computer network system that there was no clear understanding of what it would do, how it would work, or even if it was needed or workable.
This is not dissimilar to the ID card scheme, as per my previous posts, it is clear that the ID card system is in fact inviable under its own terms and premise.
Under the current economic situation, the government simply cannot spend money it doesn't have on a scheme that is un-viable. a cost of a MINIMUM of half a billion a year on a scheme that is unworkable and in effect a violation of rights under EU law as per S. and Marper v. the United Kingdom.
In essence, every person that requires airside access in order to perform the duties of their employment has to, under the ID card scheme, have their rights violated in order to maintain employment. So we have a challenge here that can be leveraged by the aviation community to prevent this scheme coming into full effect.
We also have a challenge under the current economic status to challenge government expenditure, however, this needs to be acted upon through your MP.
We as an aviation community have the ability to stop this white elephant in it's tracks by way of a challenge on the following points:
1. the scheme is un-viable.
2. the scheme is detrimental to national security.
3. aviation security is paramount, this scheme negates that security
4. the costs involved are too vast for detrimental effect.
5. the scheme is rendered invalid under the terms of the EUCHR.