PDA

View Full Version : BALPA against ID Cards - TUC Congress


Yarpy
3rd Sep 2008, 08:28
BALPA will be at next weeks TUC Congress. They are moving against pilots being used as guinea pigs for the UK ID Card scheme:

45 National Identity Scheme

Congress notes that the Government proposes to require workers in aviation to enrol in the National Identity Scheme in 2009. Congress has deep concerns about the implications of the National Identity Scheme in general and the coercion of aviation workers into the scheme in particular. Congress sees absolutely no value in the scheme or in improvements to security that might flow from this exercise and feels that aviation workers are being used as pawns in a politically led process which might lead to individuals being denied the right to work because they are not registered or chose not to register in the scheme. Congress pledges to resist this scheme with all means at its disposal, including consideration of legal action to uphold civil liberties.

British Air Line Pilots’ Association

Well done chaps! Hope this wakes the Home Secretary up.

Link to the agenda: http://www.tuc.org.uk/congress/tuc-15221-f0.pdf

call100
3rd Sep 2008, 20:08
Good for BALPA.....I'll certainly be lobbying my own union to support the motion....
Some of the other Unions need kicking......And yes I am kicking hard....:ok:

manrow
3rd Sep 2008, 20:59
I support the principle of ID cards, especially if it makes it difficult/impossible for illegal entrants to enter our fair land!

It is about time we adopted some of the American practices on immigration and stopped allowing absolutely anybody in. If ID cards assist that, then I am all for them.

So come on pilots, prove the system is workable not an abject refusal to co-operate.

wiggy
3rd Sep 2008, 21:40
manrow

So you are worried about illegal immigrants entering "our fair land"...sorry if I missed something but even now you need a passport to enter the UK through official channels so what difference does the ID card make? As far as us adopting American practices AFAIK even post 9/11 our US Cousins have yet to adopt ID cards.

Ultimately why should pilots, Cabin Crew and all other airside workers be the guinea pigs used to "prove" this scheme is workable? We have already ID's, we're already screened/vetted, and probably also carry passports every time we go to work. Unlike most of the UK population we are easily traced and easily tracked ( swipe in anyone). No doubt a refusal to carry these new cards we will lead to us being out of work....and in the meantime it's impact on the illegal immigration you seem to be worried about will be what precisely ??

If you really want to control illegal Immigration then I suggest you look at EU/UK Border Control, rather than giving me yet another bleedin piece of plastic I'll have to carry in my wallet. In the meantime you're obviously keen on the idea - why don't you volunteer for the trials - and persuade some of our MPs to do the same...:ugh:

Skipness One Echo
3rd Sep 2008, 21:41
If you believe that HM Government can make this work you're dangerously naive.....

llondel
4th Sep 2008, 02:03
manrow:

'Papers Please!'

Wingswinger
4th Sep 2008, 06:33
Shouldn't that be Ihren Papieren, bitte?

S78
4th Sep 2008, 06:46
Over the weekend a Polish baggage handler was arrested for stealing from hold luggage at BHX - no doubt he'd have been given an ID card based on him already holding airport ID:ugh:


Whatever happened to 5 year checkable work history/CRO checks?:=




S78

Airbus Unplugged
4th Sep 2008, 07:41
Foreign nationals are not required to undergo CRC procedures. The CRC is designed to raise £50 from every conceivable UK national to run a quango in a Scottish marginal constituency. It has no value.

Whilst BALPA discuss this, I hope they will be raising the issue of the Treaty Of Rome, which we appear to have discovered to be a can of worms.:uhoh:

Wod
4th Sep 2008, 08:05
I'll seriously consider supporting a National Identity card if it will be developed by private enterprise for Government and incorporate the following. (I've used Australian terms, but hopefully they translate OK)

Passport
Employment ID and security access code
All credit, debit, charge and in-store cards
Medicare ( Health Insurance )
Health , Pension and Senior Citizen entitlement stuff
Driving, flying, yachting and related licences
Social Club and Motoring Organisation membership

Put that lot on a single card and you will get my attention.

Otherwise forget it. It's just another card, and I have too many now.:sad:

A and C
4th Sep 2008, 10:10
I have no political objection to a national ID card as all the information that will be on it is already held on one file or another by the government. The big strength of this is that a number of different computer systems have to be entered to access the data.

By having the data all held in one place it only takes ONE computer to be hacked into for ALL your personal information to fall into the wrong hands.

It is on purly practal grounds that I object to the ID card, in my view it is an expensive reduction in security by putting all the eggs in one basket.

I respect the views of those who see this as a civil liberty's issue and fully support the BALPA stand but for me the overriding case for stopping the ID card is the ability of the government to guarantee the security of the information on the data base.

Chippie Chappie
4th Sep 2008, 12:18
A and C, It doesn't take a computer to be hacked. How many computers, disc or pen drives been mislaid in the last year? Should the person who "found" the said item want to sell it for profit.... Lots of info has gone missing.

This is like reducing the drink driving limit from 0.08 to 0.05. Maybe it's a good idea if they can enforce/operate it properly, but if they can't enforce/operate it now, why will introducing something more limiting be of benefit?

ID cards are like locked doors that only keep honest people out, they will be a hinderance for the people who don't need them in the first place.

Chips

42psi
4th Sep 2008, 12:34
I'm not in favour of these ID cards as I believe they'll do nothing to improve border control, airport security or anything else I can think of.

I might reconsider my position if they were introduced first for members of the Houses of Commons and Lords followed by all local Government Office Holders and finally all employees of National and Local Government departments and agencies.


There... those conditions should ensure that I never have to reconsider my position.



At the back of my mind throughout all this is an uneasy feeling that we are walking eyes wide open into George Orwell's future vision .....




Congratulations to BALPA and I'll certainly be trying to get my union to take the same line.

S78
4th Sep 2008, 12:51
Just been announced on the local news that BHX will be one of the first airports where these ID cards will be issued:mad:


Being local news it was short on detail:hmm:, but the question is : who pays for them?

Me?
My employer?
The Airport authority?
The government?



S78

skyloone
4th Sep 2008, 13:22
The other concern here is that our own government HMRC has been involved in "stealing" private banking records and details by paying bribes to employees. Not really interested in getting into the rights and wrongs of going after tax dodgers but it does set a moral precedent. Now the question is...... dear uncle Putin, Bush or any other hatter decides they also want info and find a suitable candidate to grease? Splash out the dollars and you've got the lot. And forget about data security. Data is stored for access and as the old saying goes, many ways to skin a cat. And they are yet to prove that an ID system will actually improve aviation safety and trust they never will. They will try the old...."ah.. erm ... in the interests of security we cannot divulge where it may help"... nice one boys and girls. Passport & Licence current pass etc... work just fine. Please would the good folk in the DFT and home office just take a long holiday and enjoy their pensions without bothering us.

Skyloone

WHBM
4th Sep 2008, 13:33
The ID card scheme is good for the Civil Service. It will enable further staff to be employed who owe their jobs and thus their allegiance to the government. It will enable Civil Servants to plan continual expansion, more staff, more responsibilities, more career path, higher inflation-proofed pensions, etc. There will be significant revenue from the scheme but the Civil Servants will expect to spend all that on their own administration of it.

The fact that it hacks everyone else off and is useless in control of security is neither here nor there.

Golf Charlie Charlie
4th Sep 2008, 13:57
WHBM, brilliant : reminds me of a Yes Minister episode, the one where the hospital was deemed up and running because it had 500 administrators and no patients. Plus ca change......

stormin norman
4th Sep 2008, 17:40
Looking in my wallet i have half a dozen cards, so whats another,i have nothing to hide.
If it keeps all the undesirables out of this country and lowers my taxes-great.

amber 1
4th Sep 2008, 17:51
If it keeps all the undesirables out of this country and lowers my taxes-great.
But it wont. And when did you last hear of taxes being lowered?

manrow
4th Sep 2008, 21:46
Amber One - it just shows how we have been conditioned by this government to assume that high taxation is the only way.

It seems a change of government here would ensure the death of ID cards, which don't frighten me, and also a reduction in overall taxation if you believe the noises coming from the Conservative party!

Spartacan
5th Sep 2008, 16:54
>>I support the principle of ID cards, especially if it makes it difficult/impossible for illegal entrants to enter our fair land!<<

>>I'll seriously consider supporting a National Identity card if it will be developed by private enterprise for Government and incorporate the following.<<

>>I have no political objection to a national ID card as all the information that will be on it is already held on one file or another by the government.<<

>>Looking in my wallet i have half a dozen cards, so whats another,i have nothing to hide.<<

I am British and my family have always lived in these islands. It is up to me when I choose to identify myself to the Government. Furthermore, I do not want my life recorded and tracked on a so called 'National Identity Register'.

Under these circumstances I refuse to have an ID Card.

Do you think it appropriate that the Government should:

A. Impose a civil penalty?

B. Refuse me an airside pass?

C. Refuse me a passport?

Beausoleil
5th Sep 2008, 16:54
Looking in my wallet i have half a dozen cards, so whats another,i have nothing to hide.
If it keeps all the undesirables out of this country and lowers my taxes-great.


It's not the cards themselves, it's the associated massive database of information about us all, and the inevitability that "show me your ID card" will become a stock in trade for every council jobsworth everytime they want to put you in your place.

haltonapp
5th Sep 2008, 19:35
I have just visited the STASI museum in Leipzig, now I know where HMG got some of its ideas from!

Airbus Unplugged
5th Sep 2008, 19:48
I am British and my family have always lived in these islands. It is up to me when I choose to identify myself to the Government. Furthermore, I do not want my life recorded and tracked on a so called 'National Identity Register'.

Well said, Sir. Can I join your army?

Can anyone identify the point from which we ceased to be a free society?

spud
5th Sep 2008, 19:53
It started in May 1997

Vic Filippo
5th Sep 2008, 22:30
I agree too

ECAM_Actions
5th Sep 2008, 23:33
This system will never work.

Passports are already supposed to do this - they don't.

People travel on fake passports - so the Government think this system is fool-proof? Easy - the Bad Guys will get people working on the inside. This system will be subverted like all the others. It's a question of when, not if.

The only issue is the sheer amount of data that will be held on file (and none of it will do anything to increase security in any form). The Government has shown over and over and over again it is completely incapable of handling such a system, so on that basis alone, it should not be permitted.

"Ihren Paperien, Bitte" indeed!

The very fact they don't even do security checks on certain air-side workers (foreigners) because it is "too difficult" shows how much they really care about security. If it is too difficult to check their background - you don't employ them!!! To hell with political correctness/anti-discrimination laws - they're unsuitable candidates.

:mad::mad::mad:

>> and the inevitability that "show me your ID card" will become a stock in trade for
>> every council jobsworth everytime they want to put you in your place.

Councils have far too much power. I think it is decentralized Government by stealth IMHO. They're looking at giving them yet more powers, this time to check your e-mails and web history (in the name of crime prevention/detection, of course)! :mad: I hope they have fun with my encrypted e-mail! :cool:

ECAM Actions.

Nov71
6th Sep 2008, 00:42
I had 2 colleagues-
1. Jim, Welsh caucasian, born in India to english parents whilst father based in India.
2. Raj, born in UK to Indian parents with UK passports
Invariably, Jim was 'checked' by passport control, whilst Raj was not, based on place of birth!

To fly inside the UK I prefer to carry a £7 CitizenCard, rather than my more valuable passport, as my only available photo ID. It is accepted as proof of ID for opening bank accounts & proof of age (50+) It will suffice until eligible for a free bus pass next year.
It seems military ID (eg F1250) may give you access to bases covered by the Official Secrets Act but not a budget hotel room in Woking.

As a free-born citizen I was incensed to be asked for photo ID to fly within my own Country, when I could travel overland without hindrance.
Work-related Security ID I can accept but not one linked to my life history!
If 'papers' are demanded, I think I still have my post-war ID card.

The proposed Childrens' database should also be resisted, as should the DNA database for arrested but not convicted suspects.

I predict the first forged UK ID card will be circulating within weeks of the first compulsory card, which the Govt promised would not be before 2010-15?

Sorry if this is thread creep.

Spartacan
6th Sep 2008, 07:17
>>Well said, Sir. Can I join your army?<<

Of course!

Sign on at: http://www.no2id.net/

p7lot
6th Sep 2008, 07:52
I don't need an ID card.........I know who I am.
If I say my name out loud it is checkable......anything fake is not going to pan out.
I do not believe ID cards are the prudent way forward as I am one of the "salute the man, not the uniform" subscribers.
Just my two bobs worth you understand.

ETOPS
6th Sep 2008, 09:49
"Ihren Paperien, Bitte" indeed!



I think the Geheime Staatspolizie used to to demand "Ausweis bitte!"
but nevertheless it amounts to the same thing - we are heading towards a police state..........

qwertyplop
7th Sep 2008, 17:18
The notion that many civil servants voted for and would sustain this bunch of morons because they owe a debt of gratitude to this government, as expressed by a fellow forumite, is laughable.

Most civil servants that I've met resent the politicisation of their roles by this government and the PCS union is about to ballot it's members regarding strike action around this years pay awards - we'll see how grateful the civil service is then when the ballot results come in.

As repugnant as it might sound - I think the only reason things are not as bad as they could be is because of the civil service. I qualify this by looking at the 'elected' representatives from all parties that were voted in by the MORONIC idiots that put them there in the first place.

You and I.

Who'd work for less this year than last? Seems that civil servants are not immune from this either - and while there are roles that we could probably manage without we clearly need civil servants doing jobs for the apparent greater good than merely profit.

In essence, what I'm saying is that no-one is immune from the harm and chaos this government has created and caused. Insidious attacks on just about everything that distinguishes a free society from one that oppresses, attacks on the family, attacks on the rule of law, attacks on soveriegn rule, attacks on the union of our constituant states, attacks on the working man, attacks on our armed forces - one could go on.

It must be resisted - at the ballot box - and by every union or congress articulating freedom of expression that exists in the UK today be it local or national.

The edge of the abyss is upon us - what we do next determines those perceived freedoms and hard fought for priviliges.

I'm off to New Zealand because I only see more of the same - I hope I'm wrong. I might get 20 years there before the same old ****e cripples that country.

6chimes
7th Sep 2008, 18:02
It would also seem worth pointing out that when all of us airside workers have these wonderful ID cards, there will have to be scanners/readers at all airside locations to check us in/out.

So now all the logistics are in place; who is to say that from a given date anyone wishing to leave or enter the UK will have to have an ID card or not get in/out. A family wanting to go on holiday will all have to have ID cards.

This is just a government scam to track us, tax us and generally overstep the role of the government of a supposedly free society.

To work airside I have already got several forms of ID.

This has been dragged out now for years and it is just the pride of those imbeciles in Westminster who do not want to appear on the 6 O'clock news announcing another U-turn. Bulldozer politics.

6

Alwaysairbus
7th Sep 2008, 18:25
And after ID cards we get the DNA samples which are rumoured to be required to hold an airside pass in the near future...

"Hello Mr Alwaysairbus, could you please fill this DNA sample bottle up quickly before i can pass you you're new ID card"

I wonder if you're allowed to take your sample through the x ray machine if it's under 100ml's???

42psi
7th Sep 2008, 18:32
It would also seem worth pointing out that when all of us airside workers have these wonderful ID cards, there will have to be scanners/readers at all airside locations to check us in/out.




Oh no there won't .. that's one of the points to objecting ...

The new national ID card will have nothing at all to do with your airside access .. you can quite happily leave it at home, you don't need it for your work and it won't be asked for/required.

It's simply that airside aviation workers have been picked on as an easy group to coerce into having it.

By making it a condition of being allowed airside access to have a new National ID Card (even though it won't be passed or/used to to grant access) it means you have to get one or give up your job.

:mad:

A Very Civil Pilot
7th Sep 2008, 18:44
The big problem is that once you have an ID card, you are who it (and the computer) says you are. If any of the data are wrong, then you will have a big problem trying to prove it is incorrect. It also works the other way, with a fake ID. If it claims you are Mr. J. Bloggs, then that is who you are, even if in reality you are Mr. O. B Laden.

There will be errors, there will be fakes; it's only a matter of time.

Rwy in Sight
7th Sep 2008, 19:32
We stopped being a free society in September 2001 when everybody was assumed to be guilty and a potential threat to security. So much for the pressumtion of innocence.

Rwy in Sight

whyisthat
8th Sep 2008, 16:29
:=Just a thought, but as a BALPA member when are they going to ask me what I think about ID cards. I was under the distinct impression that they were supposed to represent me, and therefore my views.

I am am pro ID cards, for many reasons.

Is this just another vehicle for those at the top of BALPA to push there own agendas in search of that MEP job, or similar ??

qwertyuiop
8th Sep 2008, 19:33
whyisthat,

I would like to know some/all of your reasons to be pro ID cards. I am undecided and need convincing.

nonemmet
8th Sep 2008, 20:45
If some airside workers will not be required to have ID cards (as a condition for keeping their job) because they fall into the "too difficult category", then on the face of it this would seem to be blatant discrimination. Must have missed something.

call100
8th Sep 2008, 22:07
A question for all those 'Pro ID card'. Are you Pro ID card as in a card that proves your identity or are you Pro ID card and database?
Those that approve the database part no doubt would not have minded living in East Germany and having everything about them recorded.
The Government has already added extra bodies entitled to access to Contactpoint (Your children's database) without any consultation.
I usually find that those Pro ID card people have little concept of the database and the Governments dismal record on changing the use of any law or system without consultation or agreement.
I don't worry about them as it is clear that they are in a minority.
Even if I were Pro ID, I would be against the blatant discrimination of Aviation workers.
Having met with the Home Office on the issue of ID cards I am now even more against the introduction in general and especially of the issue to aviation workers.
As it will be specifically against the law for anyone to demand to see your ID card (In the beginning) It would seem a totally pointless exercise.
We know that the system will be trialled at one UK airport initially before being rolled out to all. The Home Office say that the decision has not yet been made as to which airport. They say it would have to be one that is willing to cooperate. However, logical deduction points to Manchester, based on the fact that some new airside passes are now only being issued with a renewal date of 12 months instead of the normal 5 years. Also the fact that they are the first to introduce the full biometric system.
As for cost. £30 will be the initial cost (Rising significantly in later years) and it will be up to each individual/group/Union to negotiate with employers as the individual will be responsible for the cost. I don't think the employers are going to be happy spending hundreds of thousands on a scheme that offers absolutely no benefits especially as it will not even replace the existing security checks.

Chippie Chappie
8th Sep 2008, 22:28
Good point call100. Maybe we're looking at it from the wrong angle. As the airport wants the ID card, maybe they should be the one that pay for them?

whyisthat, I understand you are pro ID card, and I respect that. However, it appears that you are in a minority. The majority oppose ID cards. And that is how a democracy is supposed to work.

Cheers,

Chips

call100
9th Sep 2008, 00:45
CC
I think you will find that most airports are not in favour of the ID card system. At least two Airport MD's have signed the letter from The British Air Transport Association. They are Birmingham and Luton Airports. I dare say the attitude of all the others will be the same.
In fact the only organisation in favour of the National ID scheme is the Government.:rolleyes:

6chimes
9th Sep 2008, 14:13
If I am forced to apply for an ID card to keep my job, what information will I have to submit to get one and how will it be verified? As far as I can see the only way for me to prove that I am who I say I am would be to offer all the other forms of ID that I currently have, which is supposedly not enough hence the reason we need ID cards. :confused:

6

42psi
9th Sep 2008, 14:20
Call100 & Chippie Chappy...

I'm afraid you're making the same fundamental error that many make on this subject.


It doesn't matter what airport they introduce it at first or what biometric or otherwise systems that airport has installed ..


The new National ID Card will not need to be carried by you at work as it will not be requested or required for airside access.

You will continue to use your present airside ID ... the two identification methods are not related or connected


Other than by the holder ... the govt. simply intend to make it a condition of being issued with an airside pass that you hold a National ID Card.


They could just have easily and rationally decided that it would be holding library card that would require a National ID Card

:*

jshg
9th Sep 2008, 14:52
whyisthat -

I too am a BALPA member, and utterly opposed to ID cards. Your opinion is just as valid as mine (although I believe you are in a very small minority indeed).
The BALPA NEC and others have discussed IDs and the overwhelming consensus there too is opposition to them. If there were significant dissenting voices they might ask the membership - but in a democratic organisation the leaders lead without referring everything to the 'rank and file'.

Chippie Chappie
9th Sep 2008, 18:43
call100, fair enough. And even better as it will mean assistance in fighting the blasted things. Put the pain and discomfort in to someone elses' court and turn them into you ally.

42psi, also a fair point - that doesn't make the press. All a bit rediculous for something that the Labor Party wishes to spend about as much on as will be spent on the 2012 Olympics.

Great idea to have a two-year test on public servants. To get a job in the public service, you must possess an ID card. Surely they must require an even greater scrutiny than aircrew if they will be managing the system.

Chips

call100
9th Sep 2008, 20:09
42psi
I don't think I have any misconceptions over the ID card system. I don't think I had any before discussions with the Home Office or After.
From my last post.....
As it will be specifically against the law for anyone to demand to see your ID card (In the beginning) It would seem a totally pointless exercise.
I have not stated that it matters a jot which airport is used to begin with. The trial will not be just an issuing exercise. Everything you posted has already been discussed and it is widely known that you will not have to carry it and that it does not replace any other documents/passes.
Unlike some I am actually doing something constructive and not just sitting around in angst. I will do my best to keep this forum informed of anything relevant.
The next major step will be whether the TUC vote for the BALPA motion at Congress.
My opinion is that if they back it then that will put a major obstruction in the way of the act. However, since all the TU National officers met with Jaqui Smith last Thursday, at short notice, I am not counting any chickens.

Benjaman
10th Sep 2008, 12:37
Why are so many people in the UK against a national identity card?

I live in Sweden and my driving license is my national ID card also. It has my personal ID number on it and whenever i use my credit card above a certain limit, i have to produce the card to be swiped. It makes life a lot easier and protects me from fraud. MY UK driving license before i moved here was a complete joke. I showed it to a policeman here once and he almost laughed at the piece of paper.

It's just like this new system in the UK called Chip and Pin. They were so late to the table, it's a joke. I was using my UK card here in Sweden and entering my pin at supermarket checkouts for years before i received this chip and pin card. For me nothing has changed.

I can understand that it shouldn't be forced on pilots to get public acceptance, but i just can't see what all the fuss is about.

jshg
10th Sep 2008, 12:57
Because the UK ID card will be a massive database used and cross-referenced by many, many other agencies. Because the UK has a proven track record of leaving said data on trains or roundabouts. Because this data is controlled/used by self-important jobsworths whose arrogance is matched only by their inefficiency/stupidity. Because mistakes in similar (smaller) databases have already proved impossible to correct in a timely fashion. Because any UK national under the age of 40 is genetically unable to spell properly or consistently, so this will find its way onto the database as corruptions. Because any criminal who hacks into the system then automatically has access to every corner of your life. Because these same jobsworths have just made overfilling your bin (which is only emptied once a fortnight) a criminal offence, which will eventually have a negative impact on your ID and therefore your ability to fly an aircraft. These are just the points that spring immediately to my mind.
We already have photo driving licences which fulfill 90% of the security requirement, and could be made to 99.9% - but that wouldn't create enough jobs for said jobsworths.
Apart from the above, I have few objections to IDs ...

qwertyuiop
10th Sep 2008, 13:11
jshg,

You forgot to mention the Billions of pounds it will cost.

flap15
10th Sep 2008, 13:55
I may be a minority or part of the silent majority who can not be botherd to air their views. I know for a fact that only those opposed fundametaly to somthing or finally forced into a corner and told to make a decision will actively say or do somthing about whatever is ratteling their cage. So I am going to get of my couch and say:

I believe a national ID card system is a good thing and only those with somthing to hide need fear it.

Now with all grand ideas the implementation often ruins the principle. However I do not think that because the system is not perfect we should not continue with it. We are after all human and the first to stand up and say "I am perfect" is not of this planet. So having set light to the blue touch paper I will step back the required safe distance.


.....Boom.....

spannersatKL
10th Sep 2008, 15:53
Ahh the good old ...'If you've nothing to hide you have no worry argument' sorry won't wash with me.....the question is WHY do these stupid civil servants want all our data......all about 'control' if you ask me.....ID card, No Thanks......

Just think, no doubt this site is monitored by some 'jobsworth' at the DfT and Lackey Jackies Home Office to see whats going on. They will then be looking at the IP address of who posted what and keeping a tab on the poster.....think that far fetched....just wait and see what these pri*ks are capable of.......

Remember the signs at BA LHR base in the 70s/80s....I didn't vote Tory they said......well in this case I didn't vote for Blair/Brown's 'New Labour' stupidity (no one voted for Brown as PM it should be noted)....come the revolution when the common man wakes up to see the society that is being created by these ba$tards, will be nice to see the heads on spikes on Tower Bridge.......

Dysag
10th Sep 2008, 16:46
Think of it like this.

In parts of "the continent", if a cyclist riding nude down Main Street gets stopped by the police it's not because of being butt naked, but that he/she probably isn't carrying their compulsory ID.

In the UK/US they'll risk a charge of indecent exposure but no-one will ever ask for their "papers". The phrase leaves a bad taste in a free country.

jshg
10th Sep 2008, 17:23
At the risk of being banned for straying too far from aviation, the spectacularly mis-named Child Support Agency was given the power to cancel driving licences if they believed - often wrongly - that an individual was not paying what the CSA said was the correct maintenance. That is the problem with putting too much political power into the hands of monkeys, and allowing an 'infraction' in one area to have ramifications in other, unrelated areas.
Now, quickly back to aviation. An ID card will have a negligible positive effect on aviation security, regardless of whether or not it works. But it will have many negative effects, not the least of which is unnecessary cost for the sake of Gordon's political vanity.

oapilot
10th Sep 2008, 18:05
Having corresponded with my MP (Labour, back bench) on the matter, he is quite open about the fact that many MPs have serious concerns themselves about how this is being rolled out, the relevance of the whole project, and also I believe the principle of so much data being held in such an unsecure fashion. That is before you even get into the arguments about what the Govt wants all this information for and what use it will be in enhancing national security.
My replies from the Home Office highlight the improved security we will benefit from as a result of the introduction of National ID Cards for airside workers. They do not explain how this will come about though. This despite the fact that foreign nationals will not be required to hold them, and the incumbant Government of this country allows a system whereby foreign nationals falling into the "too difficult to check properly" category are rubber stamped through anyway. Presumably a party so concerned with spin and being seen to do the right thing would not wish to be accused of discrimination.
We as an industry are an easy target. The Govt gets to pick on a sector where you will have no choice but to comply if you wish to continue down your current career path, and at the same time gets to crow about all the proactive steps it is taking to make us all safer. Dumbing down of society that has taken place makes sense when you wish to sell the public smoke and mirrors lies. Please don't forget that our current Home Secretary was more than happy to shaft the guardians of public safety over back-dated pay deals without batting an eye-lid.
Surprisingly, if we could have a relevant, secure and beneficial scheme for National ID, I would happily support it. Sadly, we have a white elephant (to join the herd of others we have had to suffer and pay for over the last 15 and no doubt as many again) instead. And it is being driven by a bunch of people I wouldn't trust to sit the right way round on the lavatory.
Sorry to those of you having to wade through this very personal rant, but this matter has been seriously p:mad::mad:g me off for several months now.

oap

spud
10th Sep 2008, 18:34
It's another step towards being micro chipped at birth. No doubt, this would be presented as 'For your comfort and convenience but primarily for your security', and the reality tv generation would believe it.

For my comfort and convenience but primarily for the nation's security, would the chap all those funny twitches, stumpy finger nails and an obsession with control through databases be kind enough to hand over to someone a bit more normal. Although it breaks with tradition, perhaps some form of election might be appropriate.

manrow
10th Sep 2008, 18:42
spud

you have the answer - micro chipped at birth!

call100
10th Sep 2008, 20:56
One of Hitler's methods of controlling the German citizenry was mandatory national I.D. cards. No one could obtain work, food or travel without such cards and by means of the information on them, those who were socially unfit for the new German state could be easily identified and eliminated. :ooh:


The TUC Congress voted overwhelmingly to support BALPA's motion today. Although I must say the spokesman didn't give the best arguments against. Instead this was given by the seconder from Prospect. It was passed despite a disapointing speech by the GMB representative.
Hopefully, now we can begin organising with a bit more bite at individual airports and affected companies.

To those of you who think you have nothing to hide...I hope you are right...Forever...:E

call100
10th Sep 2008, 21:03
you have the answer - micro chipped at birth! Laugh you may.........


‘ContactPoint’ – formerly the Information-Sharing Index
The Children Act 2004 empowered the Secretary of State for Education to create a database (or databases) of everyone in England who is aged under 18. In July 2007, the regulations that will bring this first national database of children into being were passed by Parliament.
The government has announced that the database will be called ContactPoint. It was originally known as the Information-Sharing Index, but re-branded in February 2007 because of negative publicity about information sharing.

spannersatKL
10th Sep 2008, 21:23
So basically the &*() s are out of control? Sooner the idiot at No10 gets his marching orders North the better?

Chippie Chappie
10th Sep 2008, 21:47
It wasn't just Hitler who enforced ID cards. In the 1930s, Holland carried ID cards and they had nothing to fear because they trusted their government. And they were right...nearly. Unfortunately, their ID cards were related to information which also included their religion. So, when the Nazis came marching through in 1940 they could easily identify all the Jews...who were smartly marched off to concentration and death camps.

But hey, I'm being paranoid. That could never happen now....

What I want to know is why will I be stopped from doing my job for refusing to carry an item that's not related to my job that the rest of the population don't have to carry?

Still it's easy. Call an election Gordon :E

Chips

Beausoleil
10th Sep 2008, 23:34
I believe a national ID card system is a good thing and only those with something to hide need fear it.


What an odd thing to say. Why do you imply that "having something to hide" is suspicious in itself?

I prefer not to have strangers poking around in my life - there are aspects of my life I want to hide from the state. In short, I value my privacy. There have been lots of words for people who find that suspicious - the East Germans used to call them the Stasi.

The assumption that "having something to hide" is sinister is very foreign to traditional British values. I don't want to live in a country where preserving one's privacy is considered a suspicious activity

6chimes
11th Sep 2008, 00:02
The notion of having nothing to hide therefore you should not fear being monitored by the state is nothing short of communism.

Who knows what ideas those that rule our lives have in store for us. And with the evidence of the last ten years that labour has so far displayed, it will be full of using laws to suit themselves (think back to when they used their new anti terrorist laws to arrest a 70 yr old labour activist from speaking at a conference).

When these ID cards can be used to determine what you get and when, then how long before those political imbeciles use them for compliance to their way of thinking?

For those of you that have viewed these posts from outside the Uk, and many of you already carry ID cards you may wonder at our reluctance. You have not lived with a government hell bent on protecting itself rather than doing its job of running this country. They want to control us like a huge train set and use us a live experiment that they once talked about as students when as now they have no knowledge of the real world, just an idea of some political ideal.

They are incompetent and they have proven themselves to be so on many occasions, so why would any rational person allow their free lives to be handed over to these creatures?

It is not who I am that worries me it is what they will do with me.

6

Fragman88
11th Sep 2008, 01:04
I caught an article on the BBC internet news service a couple of days ago about a data stick being lost containing sensetive information. Th worrying thing was they also listed many past events, the CDs lost in the post, heaps of laptops stolen etc. etc.

I had an ID card in HK for may years and found it to be good, however I'd need to see a big change in the UK's data security before being keen on supplying more data then they already have:=

llondel
11th Sep 2008, 03:32
flap15:
I believe a national ID card system is a good thing and only those with somthing to hide need fear it.

I think the preferred response at this point is usually to ask how much you earn, when you last had sex and with whom.

Most people get the point at this stage and most of the rest probably ought to be carrying cards to identify them and warn the rest of us what we're dealing with. Unfortunately it doesn't work with politicians because what they earn is a matter of public record and the rest is probably already in the tabloids.:E

Spartacan
11th Sep 2008, 16:14
Discussed on NO2ID:

NO2ID :: View topic - BALPA TUC motion passed against National Identity Scheme (http://forum.no2id.net/viewtopic.php?t=24003)

Quote:

>>Generalising on the basis of a modest knowledge of UK pilots and an even more modest knowledge of BALPA:
1. BALPA and its members wouldn't get into this fight if they didn't feel they had to.

2. They wouldn't get into it if they didn't believe they could win.

3. If they back down, it will be because they have been bought off. It's hard to see what the government could do to buy them off.

4. If they don't back down, the government will have to back down. Another defeat in IPS's unbroken record of defeats. (Good job IPS don't run an airline.)

5. When IPS were trounced by the banks and the major retailers, there was no crowing. There was no benefit to the banks and the retailers to be gained by crowing. The situation could be different with BALPA. They have an interest in making it clear to their members, loudly and in public, that BALPA will always strongly defend them.

6. The TUC has the same interest in making it clear to its members and everyone else that they are powerful. Demonstrating their power in the cause of everyone's civil liberties, not just their members', could be universally attractive. Which would make IPS look universally unattractive. Which they are ...

7. ... because my God, if ever there was a natural constituency for ID cards, it's airline pilots, and if IPS can't convince airline pilots that ID cards are a good idea, they can't convince anyone.

8. IPS's defeat by BALPA will strengthen the hand of the NUJ and UCU, who have also had a motion carried, and strengthen the hand of the NUS, whose members are next on the ID card roster after non-EEA nationals and airside workers ...<<

Spartacan
11th Sep 2008, 17:22
Also NO2ID Press Release:

http://www.no2id.net/news/pressReleaserelease.php?name=Unions_overwhelmingly_oppose

>>"The Home Office has almost given up pretending that its ID scheme is necessary for national security. Those involved in aviation security day-to-day don't believe it. Now the plan is that ID will confront us in the workplace - as a form of official permission to earn a living. We are delighted that the unions and their members will be ready to fight it."<<

ZeBedie
11th Sep 2008, 17:45
++ TUC PLEDGES TO RESIST THE NATIONAL IDENTITY SCHEME "WITH ALL
MEANS AT ITS DISPOSAL" ++

This week the Trades Union Congress (TUC) voted at their Congress in
Brighton to resist the National ID scheme with all means at its
disposal, "including consideration of legal action to uphold civil
liberties". The motion was put forward by the British Air Line Pilots'
Association (BALPA) in light of government plans to require workers in
aviation to enrol in the National Identity Scheme in 2009. The motion
states: "Congress sees absolutely no value in the scheme or in
improvements to security that might flow from this exercise and feels
that aviation workers are being used as pawns in a politically led
process which might lead to individuals being denied the right to work
because they are not registered or chose not to register in the scheme."
The motion puts unions on a collision course with the government over
civil liberties and contradicts government spin that "unions approve ID
cards" issued after the Labour Party National Policy Forum at Warwick at
the end of July.

esa-aardvark
11th Sep 2008, 20:41
I just took a look at my European ID card. It's huge
a piece of A4 paper (looks quite nice). Gives my full name,
place of birth, and parents first names. Also my nationality
address and my NIE (=tax number).
If only the UK would stop at something like that.

Why oh why does the UK need all the other data ?

call100
11th Sep 2008, 22:14
"The Home Office has almost given up pretending that its ID scheme is necessary for national security. Those involved in aviation security day-to-day don't believe it. Now the plan is that ID will confront us in the workplace - as a form of official permission to earn a living. We are delighted that the unions and their members will be ready to fight it."
As I said in another post..At the meeting with the Home office, they actually stressed that the requirement for us to have the ID had nothing to do with Anti-Terrorism. In fact that was the only time it was mentioned in the entire meeting. We did go expecting them to bang on about security and were surprised that they took this path. As it says above, they seem to have given up on that one. That is not to say that Government is not still saying that, they don't know how to change the mantra in the face of defeat.
The motion puts unions on a collision course with the government over
civil liberties and contradicts government spin that "unions approve ID
cards" issued after the Labour Party National Policy Forum at Warwick at
the end of July.

The vote at the TUC congress was from the collective delegates. It would be wrong to assume that some of the National Officers at Warwick were giving any indication that they were against ID cards.
The GMB delegate seemed to have lost the plot at congress and had no idea what the arguments were. Thankfully BALPA used the right of reply and more or less said that. I do still think that the arguments that BALPA put over were not necessarily the best I've heard, but, at least they stood up to be counted and the outcome was positive. (I am not a member of BALPA)

Yarpy
12th Sep 2008, 06:05
I do still think that the arguments that BALPA put over were not necessarily the best I've heard, but, at least they stood up to be counted and the outcome was positive.

Who gave the speech? Jim McAuslan?

Do you have a link to the transcript?

deltahotel
12th Sep 2008, 09:08
Do I have a philosophical objection to ID cards? No - used one for years in the RAF and seen other countries use them. Do I think govt can bring them in without :mad: it up and costing an astronomical amount of money? No I don't - look at their record on big IT projects. Will they be forgeable? Reckon so and someone will.

call100
12th Sep 2008, 09:21
Do I have a philosophical objection to ID cards? No - used one for years in the RAF and seen other countries use them

Lets not lose sight of the problem....It's not the ID card (We all have one for work) its the Database and Government control. Unfortunately in the UK you can't have one without the other.

call100
12th Sep 2008, 09:44
Who gave the speech? Jim McAuslan?

Do you have a link to the transcript?Even better.....BBC Iplayer still has the whole conference....For those not Union minded (unless it suits) the relevant part of the video is on the time line at 2.33.50. to save you watching all the other stuff
TUC Conference: 2008: 10/09/2008 (http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-4519083806271793156&vt=lf&hl=en)

Having re listened to the speech. I think he may have done better than I first thought. It is difficult at congress as you only get 7 minutes to put the motion across. The second speaker for 'Prospect' made some of the missing points.
Stick with it BALPA reply to the bad speech from the GMB representative.
UCU representative makes very good points.

saddest aviator
27th Sep 2008, 11:04
I think we all know that UK nationals who work airside are going to be subject to new rules concerning UK ID cards. I think whether we like it or not, all of us that work in such an environment are going to be forced to have the new cards. The question I have is are we also going to have to have an individual airport specific card as well as we have at the moment? Some numpty at the BAA security is probably dreaming up some excuse as we speak as to the reasons why we should all still be subject to additional screening as well as UK government screening. After all security is a good little earner for airports. Any thoughts?

fireflybob
27th Sep 2008, 11:39
The topic of ID cards came up on Any Questions (BBC Radio 4) last night - Any Answers is on at 1310 today and I thought this would be a good opportunity to get on air to mention how airside workers feel about this suggested imposition. I am just off to fly but perhaps someone even more erudite than me might want to give them a call over this issue - good luck!

qwertyplop
27th Sep 2008, 16:45
Saddest Aviator Wrote:

Some numpty at the BAA security is probably dreaming up some excuse as we speak as to the reasons why we should all still be subject to additional screening as well as UK government screening. After all security is a good little earner for airports. Any thoughts?

No chance - there's a huge difference between passing through a 5 year check as is required now and being vetted properly - I'm sure some of the ex - forces people here will back me up on that one. Ergo the airports would shut down overnight if vetting was to be done properly - remember the Trever McDonald show about BHX and the behaviour of our airside colleagues? I sure do.

Another thing - what no-one here is picking up upon is the guard force companies in some UK airports are employing increasing amounts of Eastern Europeans to physically screen SLF and staff now - are these the same people that we all know CANNOT be screened for criminal records right now according to the Daily Mail?

BBC NEWS | UK | Airport staff avoid crime checks (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7389219.stm)

In such circumstances, someone who has been honest and upfront about a previous mistake and declared it is a safer bet than some of those whose antecedence cannot be checked.

call100
27th Sep 2008, 20:44
Come on people...Lets not lose sight of the reason you will be required/forced to have a national ID card as an airside worker......It's so that the Government can begin the role out of the system to the general population with the argument about how many already have them...If they make it voluntary no one will have one.
In Talks with the home office officials who are implementing this they actually stated it was nothing to do with security.
The Act says that no one can demand to see your ID including the Police. Once issued you will not be required to carry it anywhere. This card is only seen as something we need by the present ruling party...They have no support from any other area.
Lets not make this an aviation only issue. It is a Civil Liberties abuse.
As for the cost £30 each for your initial cards.....It will rise in the future once they have every one on the system and it will be renewable.
Some of us are fighting the whole thing and sometimes despair at the 'There's nothing we can do' attitude.

qwertyplop
28th Sep 2008, 07:02
I don't doubt you are correct call100 but I'll bet a months salary that if you don't produce the card, you won't get an airside pass in the first instance.

Thereafter, I'll bet that anytime a security operative asks you for the national ID card, despite the fact that you may already have given him/her you airside pass to pass through a barrier, and you refuse, you'll be denied entry because these places are all private property and they can stipulate what they like if you wish to proceed through.

Same as now really, you don't have to submit to a search if you don't want to, that's your perogative but they'll just turn you away and you can't work.

We are bent over a desk and our pants have just been removed............

:\

call100
28th Sep 2008, 10:07
Sorry but that's not how it's working...Initially new pass applicants will need to provide one purely as Identity proof for their airside pass. It will not be required to be carried by any airport staff or shown at any security point.
As a security pass of any kind the National ID is of no use whatsoever.
As I say the fight goes on.......At least I won't give in with a whimper of inevitability....
The problem with all of this is the Data base that goes with it....It was also made clear by the Home office that the first cards would be a prototype. Linking of everything you do to your NID will follow. Everything you do will be tracked by the Government. Any Government now or future can use that information for whatever they please. They have already stated that they will sell certain information for commercial purposes......

Spartacan
28th Sep 2008, 10:40
Here is the link to the BBC Any Questions programme:

BBC - Radio 4 - Any Questions? (http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/news/anyquestions.shtml)

ID Cards are discussed about 40.15 mins in.

Whislt we are on the subject why has BALPA not published a press release about the TUC resolution? It was quite a coup for them - you would think they'd be proud of it!

Litebulbs
28th Sep 2008, 11:04
Would anyone contributing to this thread be prepared to refuse to hold a UKID card?

After the TUC conference, I would hope that some work is being carried out to organise an industry wide response to this issue, but I imagine it will come down to a choice and it will be the individual putting at risk, their employment.

llondel
28th Sep 2008, 14:19
Would anyone contributing to this thread be prepared to refuse to hold a UKID card?

I'm not planning on getting one, but as I don't work airside that's not particularly relevant. I renewed my passport early (anyone who needs one before 2011 probably ought to see about getting one before they hang all the biometrics off it) to avoid that being a way of getting me in the system.

What it probably needs is for every airport to have a collection centre where people can dump their ID card application paperwork when it's received, so that a big visible pile of evidence that others are refusing the cards can help inspire the ones who are nervous about doing it.

Max Angle
28th Sep 2008, 14:36
Would anyone contributing to this thread be prepared to refuse to hold a UKID card?

I think it's time for the aviation bosses who wrote to the government a few months back objecting to the scheme to put back up their words with action. They need to write again stating that, with their full support, none of their employees will be applying for cards.

Assuming the Tories stick to their word (and lets face it politicians always do!) it doesn't matter anyway because they will scrap the system when (not if) they win the next election.

qwertyplop
28th Sep 2008, 14:40
call100 wrote:

Sorry but that's not how it's working...Initially new pass applicants will need to provide one purely as Identity proof for their airside pass. It will not be required to be carried by any airport staff or shown at any security point.

This is the bit where we part in our views I think - I just can't see it stopping here. I'm sure that because airports are private property, the guard forces will be instructed to check the ID cards to verify the airside passes. It'll be done randomly and while you are not compelled to do it, refusal will lead to your airside pass being withdrawn.

I'm confident this will be the case eventually.

I'm emigrating because I really can't stand what has happened in this country any more - it's so ******* obvious to me yet seems to allude millions of others. So long as Joe Schmoo has cheap credit, a new car every two years and a 42' plasma telly - he's happy that he is making progress in his miserable little existance, he's happy to sell his soul down the river for whatever reason he's told by the powers that be. Given the present economic and security situation we face, perhaps Joe is waking up to what he's signed up for, as if it really matters though, the damage has already been done.

I'd go so far as to say that anyone who signs up to these miserable cards is a collaborator, strong words yes but you legitimise all that is wrong with the way we are governed today.

I despise and pity the future you are signing up for if you take one of these cards.

call100
28th Sep 2008, 19:26
You are right in one respect it will change in the future. However, the law will have to be changed to enable anyone else to demand your card.....Even the Police.....It will not be required for airside access as it will have been produced for the application.. Your scenario where it will be up to the individual airport will not happen.
You are missing the point that the card is nothing to do with airports, airlines, airside workers etc. etc. It's about starting off the whole scheme. with as little objection as possible.
I can't blame you for emigrating if you are able...UK PLC is in need of a drastic kicking to get it back on track.

llondel
You hit on another point of the aviation worker requirement..It takes away your right to individual protest to some extent. If Joe Blogs at the local Butchers in the future refuses to apply for a NID along with the millions of others who will refuse he keeps his job.
Should you refuse you will be denied an airside pass, therefore forfeiting your job..
Blatant discrimination of the aviation workforce...:eek:

The national advertising campaign will start soon. It will try to allay any fears with Government Spin.....Watch out for them..For heavens sake don't fall for them.

fitliker
28th Sep 2008, 20:50
Why not a small tatoo ?
Somewhere like the left arm
IBM may still have the software and hardware it developed for the first group of people to get tatoo's before WW2:E

qwertyplop
29th Sep 2008, 18:31
call100 wrote:

Your scenario where it will be up to the individual airport will not happen.

You are missing the point that the card is nothing to do with airports, airlines, airside workers etc. etc.

I have no faith or belief that this will be the case call100, I really don't. I'm not saying you are wrong, I'm saying I just don't trust those involved in this process.

These places are private property, therefore they can do what they like, and they will. I understand they cannot compel you to do it by law but they can turn you away if you don't because they have that right. Same as the staff seach procedure now, I can refuse because I did not consent but they can refuse entry because I did not consent.

I don't think it's anything to do with the law at all, it's to do with what they want to do on their property. If they say I have to hop on one foot for 5 minutes before they let me through, what choice have I got if I want to work. It's why the security regime is different in every UK port because they've been allowed to interpret as they see fit.

I'm not that interested if it's to do with airport staff or not, that it effects me is all I'm bothered about.

I hope to be away from this stinking pit of a country before it's instigated. I never thought I'd ever say that.

:(

Apologies if this seems a bit ranty, I just don't understand how we arrived at a point where the least qualified people to pronounce on something in our work environment have acquired so much power to impose an agenda upon the majority of good hard working people for no real quantifiable reason other than their failed experiments in multiculturalism.

How on earth is that my fault?

Why on earth did people sleepwalk into this nightmare?

TheInquisitor
30th Sep 2008, 05:49
Thereafter, I'll bet that anytime a security operative asks you for the national ID card, despite the fact that you may already have given him/her you airside pass to pass through a barrier, and you refuse, you'll be denied entry because these places are all private property and they can stipulate what they like if you wish to proceed through.
No, you won't. The Identity Cards Act 2006 (Para 16, s2) specifically makes it a civil offence for ANYBODY to require you to produce the ID card for ANY purpose, or provide them with ANY information held about you on the database. If airports chose to make it a condition of passage through security, they would be breaking the law. The fact that the premises are 'private property' is irrelevant. In fact, reading through the provisions of the above-mentioned s2, any attempt to get anybody to do anything other than register and obtain a card would be illegal - with that in mind, exactly what is the purpose of forcing the aviation industry to register en-masse? The card cannot be used for anything, under current legislation.

Having said all that, I couldn't be more opposed to this scheme. As many have already said, it's not the card itself, but the data collection behind it. Read through the Act itself here (http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2006/ukpga_20060015_en_1#pb1-l1g3) - many of its provisions are truly frightening. For example, the Home Secretary can demand information, under penalty, from any person, that relates to any other person on the database. Moreover, the Act specifically authorises him to pay for that information!!! This seems more to be straight out of a Mafioso movie than a supposedly free, democratic society!

Yarpy
30th Sep 2008, 06:58
exactly what is the purpose of forcing the aviation industry to register en-masse?

It's purely political. The ID Card scheme is dying but it would be a disaster for the Government to have to cancel it before the next election so they pick a 'percieved' soft group to launch the scheme. They misread the feelings of pilots and, due to the BALPA TUC resolution, this has backfired. So, they move on to the next 'soft' group - 'overseas students, and people seeking to settle in the UK with British husbands and wives.'

Read the latest on NO2ID:stop ID cards and the database state (http://www.no2id.net/)

As as a parent, the scheme that most worries me right now is Contact Point. The thought of my child's personal data been hacked or lost is quite appaling.

rogervisual
30th Sep 2008, 07:15
The important thing here is can i legally refuse to register for one or can my employer
force me tohave one

Yarpy
30th Sep 2008, 07:28
The important thing here is can i legally refuse to register for one or can my employer force me tohave one

ID Cards will be linked, in a way that is not yet precisely clear, with the issue or renewal of your airside pass. So, no ID Card - no airside pass.

Just heard David Cameron on the Today programme confirm that he will cancel ID Cards, the National Identity Register and the children's database Contact Point.

If your money is on a Tory win at the next election then you can smile - just a little.

rebellion
30th Sep 2008, 07:43
I don't get it? If you have nothing to hide- whats the problem??

rogervisual
30th Sep 2008, 08:08
The problem is we are told a lie to get us onboard and its a waste of money and will not inprove security. Its the big brother thing and its a slippery slope. I have nothing to hide and have lived in countries that required me to have a ID card, the difference being they did not hold all the info this one will and the people who will have access to it concerns me . And the sneak it in the back door way of getting us used to the idea.

Yarpy
30th Sep 2008, 09:20
'Nothing to hide, nothing to fear' has led to a culture of individuals and organisations being careless with personal data whilst criminals and wrongdoers learn to cover their tracks carefully to avoid detection.

max_cont
30th Sep 2008, 09:32
Rebellion…the irony. Why not use your real name when you post?
Surely you have nothing to hide.

6chimes
30th Sep 2008, 14:02
The argument for ID cards that is based around 'if you have nothing to hide' is wrong and spells out everything that has gone wrong in the UK over the last 10 years of a labour government. If you don't agree with their point of view then they create spin to suggest that you are in fact some sort of radical lunatic.

i.e. If you don't agree with the way immigration has been handled over the last few years you are immediately branded a racist.

If you want to mention how we are pandering to muslim radicals you get slammed as anti-islamic.

If you are against the UK joining the Euro, you are said to be a Xenophobic.

I do not want an ID card because I live in a free country and I want to go about my business without the government knowing my every move and hence tax it. The ID card will not benefit me in any way shape of form, it will be used for other purposes that could in fact be of detriment to me. Forcing me to have an ID card that will not assist in security just because I work in a job that requires security clearance is political thuggery designed only to save their own reputations rather than back down.

Within 5 years of its implementation there will be a scandal from either losing all our information on a laptop because the private company hired to look after it all was inept or there will be some unscrupulous/incompetent employees caught abusing our information for either criminal or terrorist means. There will be wholesale failure much like the CSA debacle.

Why do I distrust this government so much? Because they are a lying, cheating, war mongering bunch of self obsessed hooligans.

6

biddedout
30th Sep 2008, 16:19
I like the bit in the act regarding required information. at 1 (7) (d) "his date and place of birth and, if he has died, the date of his death;"

Id cards for dead people.:rolleyes:

Yarpy
30th Sep 2008, 19:12
Id cards for dead people

I understand that entries on the National Identity Register will be kept until five years after the ID Cards holder has passed away.

So, yes, we are even tracked in our coffins, urns and sea burials!

TheInquisitor
1st Oct 2008, 05:15
the children's database Contact Point.
This is of particular concern. They know they can't 'sell' the idea of a database to the adult population, so what do they do? Target our children! Children do not stay children forever - they eventually grow up and become adults. Within a generation, the whole of the UK will have been 'born' onto the database!

But this is nothing new for this government and their social experimenting, dreamed up when they were sociology students in the 60s in a haze of weed and LSD. They've done this before. When they realise they can't sell their radical, social-engineering ideals to the (still largely) free-thinking adult population, they brainwash our kids by forcing schools to teach them their propaganda.

We're not heading into a big brother society - we are already there.

ID Cards will be linked, in a way that is not yet precisely clear, with the issue or renewal of your airside pass. So, no ID Card - no airside pass.
See my previous post - they cannot do this, it would be illegal. At least under the current legislation as it stands.

Yarpy
1st Oct 2008, 06:32
See my previous post - they cannot do this, it would be illegal. At least under the current legislation as it stands.

The ID Cards Act allows the Secretary of State to 'designate', by regulation, a document for the purposes of the Act.

My interpretation of this is that they would 'designate' an airside pass as an ID Card document. Thus, you would not be able to hold an airside pass without an ID Card.

It will be the same for passports.

I would love there to be a flaw in this position - if you can establish one.

Rod of Iron
1st Oct 2008, 18:07
Well, I am a little late on this one girls. Sadly in my book BLPA equals Luddites. Argemmadon is approaching, beware.
Yours truly R o I.

Stop Stop Stop
1st Oct 2008, 20:51
I personally don't have a problem owning or carrying a national ID card- why would anyone worry if they have nothing to hide? The only people who would genuinely have a problem with it clearly DO have something to hide such as criminals or illegal immigrants etc! Many countries have such a thing- in Holland you are required to carry it if you are (I believe) over fourteen.

What I DO have a problem with is having to pay for the privilege! If they want to provide me with this card, I don't have a problem carrying it. After all, I carry a wallet full of credit cards and a photo driving licence- one more won't be a problem! But I ain't paying for one!

But it certainly won't help improve security- can HMG afford to be doing this with all the associated costs at a time when the country is clearly going bust?

JOE-FBS
1st Oct 2008, 21:00
"Nothing to hide nothing to fear"

Try that one on the Birmingham 6 the Guildford 4, the late Mr Menendez or Sally Murrer. Yes, it happens to white middle class Brits as well as the Irish and foreigners. Do a web search on Ms Murrer, middle class house wife and mother, part-time local journliast, bugged, arrested, strippped, kept incommunocado and so on. Not for committing a crime but for having the wrong friend.

Wake-up.

llondel
2nd Oct 2008, 03:43
Yarpy:
I would love there to be a flaw in this position - if you can establish one.

The one flaw from the perspective of the government is if the airport workers can stand firm and overwhelmingly refuse ID cards. No card, no pass, nothing happens airside. Unions used to be good at organising large protests, this is one time where it would be nice to see them demonstrate they can still do it. After all, if everyone turns up to work with their most recent airside pass, it's going to be more like a management lockout than a strike.

You only need to hold out 18 months or so, by then we'll either have a new government or we'll be deep in the smelly stuff anyway.

Yarpy
2nd Oct 2008, 06:22
After all, if everyone turns up to work with their most recent airside pass, it's going to be more like a management lockout than a strike.

I think this issue here is that, prior to the General Election, New Labour wants to get some kind of ID Cards scheme working. So, expect a piecemeal approach. They might, for example introduce ID Cards at just one UK airport. This would reduce the opposition.

After the next Election, in the extremely unlikley event that New Labour are returned to power I would expect them to can the ID Cards scheme - it's just going to be too much hassle.

However . . . Expect the National Identity Register to remain - but linked to passports. This a key point. The Government are looking at changing passport legislation. Presently they are issued under the Royal Prerogative. They now want to put passports on a statutory basis. This would allow the Government to change the rules surrounding them. I.e. demand that you use the passport for other purposes.

Watch this space, as they say.

manrow
3rd Oct 2008, 21:19
So now you have all had a good moan are you going to accept the ID cards?

BALPA may not be powerful enough to stop this?

silverhawk
4th Oct 2008, 07:58
On the day of implementation we simply choose to go to work or not.

Nothing moves in UK airspace.

How long could the Govt and the economy cope with that?

If enough stay away from work the Govt perform a U-turn.
If sufficient turn up for work for safety not to affected then the Govt win.

That's democracy.

call100
11th Oct 2008, 10:46
Quote:
See my previous post - they cannot do this, it would be illegal. At least under the current legislation as it stands.
The ID Cards Act allows the Secretary of State to 'designate', by regulation, a document for the purposes of the Act.

My interpretation of this is that they would 'designate' an airside pass as an ID Card document. Thus, you would not be able to hold an airside pass without an ID Card.

It will be the same for passports.

I would love there to be a flaw in this position - if you can establish one.What is going to happen is they will instruct airports to establish identity of airside pass applicants via National ID's. They will not be able to demand to see them. Applicants will be free to say no. However, no airside pass would be issued.
No airside pass.........:ugh:
You will not be required to produce one until your ID is up for renewal or you are a new applicant.

Yarpy
12th Oct 2008, 06:35
From Today's Observer:

ID cards plan in crisis as the 'guinea pigs' revolt (http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/oct/12/idcards)

Plans to build support for identity cards by introducing them among 'guinea pig' groups, such as airport staff and students, are in crisis after 10,000 airline pilots vowed to take legal action to block them and opposition swept through Britain's universities and councils.

In a move that could wreck the government's strategy for a phased introduction beginning next year, the British Airline Pilots Association (Balpa) said it would seek a judicial review rather than see its members forced to adopt ID cards at a time when pilots are already exhaustively vetted.

This sounds to me like a very good move indeed. I look forward to hearing mor of this on the BALPA website!

call100
12th Oct 2008, 16:57
It's good to see that things are beginning to come together for those of us who are anti the NID card.
More is yet to be done but I think this can be defeated.
It does amaze me however, that a Government can get into such a position that it refuses to listen to the arguments and carries on regardless. They know that the apathy that runs through the British public means they can get away with it.
What is needed is mass demonstrations and calls for an immediate election. I know it won't happen but it is still the only way to get the point across.
I hope BALPA (and other TU's representing airside workers) don't bottle this. The Government is already trying to buy off the TU's with offers on other things....Still the fight goes on.:ok:

Yarpy
14th Oct 2008, 09:09
'ID card guinea pig' pilots ready to call in lawyers

'How can it be voluntary if we're all going to lose our jobs?'
'ID card guinea pig' pilots ready to call in lawyers - Public Sector - Breaking Business and Technology News at silicon.com (http://www.silicon.com/publicsector/0,3800010403,39301936,00.htm)

Balpa's national exec has already had several meetings with the government to voice its objections to ID cards, and further talks have been offered, according to the spokesman, which the union intends to take up.

However, he added: "Ministers tell us, 'well, it's going to happen anyway'.

So, in other words the Government either thinks it can ignore a Judicial Review or may influence the outcome of it in the first place.

6chimes
14th Oct 2008, 17:06
Can the government afford the cost of the ID cards now that they are hocked up to the eye balls bailing out the banks. Perhaps now would be a good time to bury bad news and quietly withdraw from this ill thought out plan.

Maybe now that Gordon runs the banks we will all have to have an ID card to use his services.

They should of implemented ID cards for Bank execs! They have been a bigger risk to our security than a pilot ever has! :ok:

6

spud
14th Oct 2008, 17:55
Ever thought of not re-electing them every time you're asked?

:*

Human Factor
14th Oct 2008, 20:35
Ever thought of not re-electing them every time you're asked?

A lot of us have thought of exactly that. Unfortunately, in recent years around 75% of people couldn't be bothered one way or the other.:ugh:

Spartacan
17th Oct 2008, 05:36
The Economist has a great peice about ID Cards and other Big Brother projects:

ID cards flounder | A solution in search of a problem | The Economist (http://www.economist.com/world/britain/displaystory.cfm?story_id=12432440)

Love the cartoon of the 'Guinea Pig' airline pilot chucking his ID Card out of the L1 door!

call100
17th Oct 2008, 20:54
Transport Secretary Geoff Hoon has said the government is prepared to go "quite a long way" with civil liberties to "stop terrorists killing people.

Do the Terrorists job for them. Frighten the people and deprive them of their Civil Liberties,
At least he has shown the true colours of this Government.
I don't think even he can believes that we believe him....:rolleyes:

manrow
31st Oct 2008, 09:56
I posted this elsewhere but is much more appropriate here:-

Public Service - ID cards will not prevent terrorism (http://www.publicservice.co.uk/news_story.asp?id=7510)

Nice to know GCHQ think IB cards will not prevent terrorism!

This Government won't listen though will they?

spannersatKL
31st Oct 2008, 18:11
manrow which side of the argument are you on? Post 109 appears to support the ID cards and you last one appears to be anti? Are you sitting on the fence?

If this bunch of to$$ers in No10 can use Anti Terror legsilation on Iceland and to assist George to extradite ordinary criminals (Note: it has never been used to actually stop proper 'terrorists' and in fact would never actually put off any of them in any case) then we are all terrorists in their eyes aren't we. So the reason they want ID cards and the big brother Data Base is that we are all in the frame and they can act like Nazis....or more probably the Stazi....frankly every time one of Browns Gangsters opens their mouths I feel sick.... :}

RVR27/09
2nd Nov 2008, 18:49
I was in favour of ID cards but with all the recent sensitive data being lost, and evidence of this data being handled in what appears to be a very casual fashion by Goverment depts, they can keep them! :*

biddedout
3rd Nov 2008, 13:15
Manrow.

You say that BALPA are not going to be able to stop this. Well, asking for a judicial review is certainly a good starting point. :ok:

Bruce Wayne
3rd Nov 2008, 18:46
I believe a national ID card system is a good thing and only those with something to hide need fear it.

This attitude really does astound me. Also it beggars belief that people cannot grasp the reality of such a scheme.

1. The principle proponent of the ID scheme, a certain Labour minister, is the majority shareholder of the company selected to manage the ID card scheme.

2. the government has already entered into discussions to raise funds by "making the data available for individualised communication delivering value for money". in other words selling the data for marketing

3. the secondary stage of the id scheme is already in progress. which is to cross reference stored data between different agencies and groups. this is to enable the construction of profiles for individuals based on shopping habits, travel habits and anything else that is recordable.

4. the oyster card system, in use on London transport records every journey made with that card and stored. The metropolitan police have made over 250 applications for data in specific individuals movements. none have been refused.

Movement of mobile phones between cells is recorded and stored and available. yes, the movements of your cellphone are recorded and stored. This is why the government is pushing for legislation for all mobile phone numbers to be cross referenced with a passport.

5. the congestion charge cameras in London record and track vehicle movements 24 hours a day, 7 days a week and stored.

6. the use of data mining is already under development in order to profile individuals for preemption of determining 'potential' to commit crime. oh yes.. this IS under development, read the freaking news.

7. identity theft is nothing new, it has been going on for centuries. it has become more prevalent now due to the amount of data that is stored on individuals and the ease of access as this data can be accessed through many different aspects in the public domain.

8. the biometric passports and id card system chips can be read by equipment easily available in electronic retailers. this information can be read by as far away as 10 ft.

you walk though a crowd with a reader in your bag how many ID's will you be able to access and store the information from ? think about it.

9. we have all encountered incorrect information about ourselves held on computer, because it's on computer doesn't mean it is correct. but you try and get it rectified.

10. in respect of the prevention of crime or illegal immigration, this is just politics of fear. the reality is, if someone wants to engage in criminal activity, they wont be using their ID, they will be using YOURS.

11. the government has systematically proven it is incapable of managing secure data. in the past year the government has lost data on over 50 million people in this country, including armed service personnel, minors, pensioners, drivers, social security recipients and so on and so.

furthermore, the government has lied to the population about the id card system and its uses.

The id card system does nothing to negate the potential of false identity, in fact quite the opposite, it actually provides easier access for the duplication of personal data for use in untoward activities.

Are you aware that the inland revenue is provided access to store card and loyalty card information which is cross referenced with your tax information. what you spend and you nectar points, or whatever, are determined by the inland revenue if it fits with what you earn and what your disclosed savings are.

as above, if some wants engage in criminal activity, they will use YOUR identity, not their own and your identity information is too easily accessible for any benefit to reduce criminality or increase security.

Am I against ID cards. You bet. For the simple reasons;

1. the security of this country
2. for law enforcement to be effective
3. democracy and freedom of movement.
4. presumption of innocence until proven guilty, not the other way round.

Yes BALPA and everyone else should be against this. If someone wants to enagage in criminal activity at an airport, i dont want them using my ID and to be frank, neither do the police, it wastes their time and resources chasing a dead end or an innocent who has had their identity duplicated without their knowledge.

call100
3rd Nov 2008, 19:40
Good Post Bruce....Good to see others have got the message...Keep it up.:ok:

Desperate
4th Nov 2008, 10:47
Bruce - an excellent post.

Ex Cargo Clown
4th Nov 2008, 11:40
Very well said Bruce.

The whole idea of ID cards isn't "Big Brother" by stealth, it's implementation of "Big Brother" by a sledgehammer.

Shame on anyone who has been fooled into thinking it will somehow make everyday life safer.

Litebulbs
4th Nov 2008, 12:58
So what are we prepared to do about it? Opposition to ID cards has been raised and backed by the TUC. BALPA are opposed and the T&G side of Unite are against it, but it will come down to me and you. It will take action to stop this happening. The soft target of airport staff could completely work against the Government, if UK air transport stopped for a day.

call100
4th Nov 2008, 20:05
Lightbulb. Disappointingly the Amicus side of Unite is sitting on the fence. However, I can assure you that at grass roots level opposition is growing. The main problem is communicating with everyone and making sure they know what the ID system actually means and not just the spin.
Too many people just don't have a clue and think (as the Government hoped) that it was just another ID to add to their collection. Once informed then 99% are not in agreement and given the choice would not have one.
We are doing everything we can at all levels to oppose this and feel that we are beginning to have some effect.
Ultimately We want for some sort of ballot to oppose this with action. Then it will be down to everyone to have their say and hopefully put this into the bin it deserves to be in...
All we can do is to keep it up....:ok:

ghgh99
5th Nov 2008, 08:14
Stories about airside ID cards in today's FT and Daily Telegraph. Expect an announcement from Jacqui Smith tomorrow (6th November).

FT: Airport ID card scheme scaled back
FT.com / Home UK / UK - Airport ID card scheme scaled back (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/825f3c6c-aadc-11dd-897c-000077b07658.html)

Controversial plans to make thousands of airport workers the first British nationals to be issued with biometric identity cards have been scaled back because of continuing opposition from the airline industry.

Ministers will announce tomorrow that the planned roll-out in the sector will begin next October, later than originally anticipated, and will be limited initially to an 18-month trial in two airports.

Manchester and London City airports have signed up in principle to the scheme after the government agreed to fund the trial, introducing the first wave of ID cards free of charge to the users and providing a further £500,000 towards improvements in pre-employment checks at the two airports.
Unions have voiced concerns about their members facing a £30 charge for an identity card before they can apply for an airside pass, while the industry generally remains concerned that the ID scheme will increase costs without bringing significant security benefits.

DT: First ID cards for Britons from autumn next year, Jacqui Smith to say
First ID cards for Britons from autumn next year, Jacqui Smith to say - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/lawandorder/3381169/First-ID-cards-for-Britons-from-autumn-next-year-Jacqui-Smith-to-say.html)

Separately, it also emerged that only indigenous workers will have to have ID cards - the rules will not apply to foreign aircrew flying into and out of the UK.

Damian Green, the Tories' immigration spokesman, said: "This proposal is opposed by airport workers, and the fact that it will not apply to foreign aircrew flying into this country shows it is a complete waste of time and money.

"It will not make our airports safer, it will simply be another intrusion by a Government committed to building the surveillance state."

However a Department for Transport spokesman said: "People who work airside and have regular access to sensitive areas have their backgrounds checked before they are given an airside pass.

"Since air crew work on aircraft, they go through the airport in the same way as passengers do – including the same security checks – and so do not need an airside pass."

Anyone care to comment on that last DfT statement? Sounds like utter tosh to me. If a (say) Russian pilot doing a walk-round doesn't have "airside access", I don't know who does!

call100
5th Nov 2008, 13:15
So pilots do not need an airside pass??????????? Great news for Pilots!
Yet another example of the Government departments not having a clue.
The opposition is having some effect. Now we need the workers at Manchester and London City to say no to the system. If they don't then they will be letting down the rest of us....

LH2
5th Nov 2008, 14:59
Essentially the same news report as above, from El Reg:
Smith's airport ID card plans cut back to small pilot scheme ? The Register (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/11/05/airport_id_card_trial/)

...and a related story from a few days ago:
Airline industry refuses to be ID card guinea pig ? The Register (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/09/25/airlines_say_no_to_id/)

llondel
6th Nov 2008, 05:17
I did like the comment in the Register about the "small pilot" scheme. How short do you have to be to need an ID card? :E

spannersatKL
6th Nov 2008, 06:20
Just been a bit on this in BBC Radio 4 Today Programme, (06:50) for those who wish to listen again. Interview with a bloke from No2ID (a bit weak in fact as he did not mention the ID Database that is the real killer of this scheme). Lets keep up the pressure and lets stop this now.


(Standby for Civil Servants in Cheltenham checking my PC IP address, e-mail traffic and monitoring my use of Oyster card to get to LCY!!!!) Yes that is all possible and would be linked under this scheme....

ShotOne
6th Nov 2008, 14:00
Well done, BALPA for opposing this mad scheme. It is completely flawed in conception and is likely to be executed badly -how many hundreds of million is the National Health computer system over budget?

Lets give them a hand with some letters to our MP's; WriteToThem - Email or fax your Councillor, MP, MEP, MSP or Welsh, NI, London Assembly Member for free (http://www.writetothem.com)

Yarpy
6th Nov 2008, 14:13
From the BALPA website:

BALPA - PILOTS RESPOND TO GOVERNMENT PLAN FOR ID CARDS (http://www.balpa.org.uk/News-and-campaigns/News/PILOTS-RESPOND-TO-GOVERNMENT-PLAN-FOR-ID-CARDS.aspx)

Commenting on the Home Secretary's announcement today that pilots and all other airport workers in Manchesster and London City airports will be required to have the Government's ID card from autumn next year, Jim McAuslan, General Secretary of the British Airline Pilots' Association (BALPA) said:

'We are not convinced that this will improve airport security.

'We are not convinced this will deal with the hotch-potch of different regulations in different airports.

'We are not convinced that this is joined up government thinking.

'We shall be discussing this issue internally and consulting with our legal team.'

Time for the mooted judicial review into whether ID Cards are 'voluntary' if you lose you job for refusing to have one!

AllyPally
6th Nov 2008, 15:55
Perhaps the way forward to stop this madness is for a BALPA member, who is close to retirement, to refuse to apply for an ID card. Then with BALPA support sue the government for preventing him from working should he be sacked.

AP

manrow
6th Nov 2008, 21:08
I'll bet your not in that position AllyPally!

Brave offer you have made there!

AllyPally
6th Nov 2008, 21:38
Actually I am very near retirement and if working out of MAN or London City would consider it very strongly. ( I'll accept your apology Manrow!). I am lucky that by the time, if ever, IDs come up north I will be retired and free to ignore the need for an ID card:E

AP

biddedout
6th Nov 2008, 22:09
Interesting to see that Manchester Airport are keen to help the Gvt round up some "volunteers".

Now who owns them I wonder? Local councils of course, 80- 90% labour controlled.

Not surprising that JS legged it up the M6 to ask for a few favours. I wonder what is being offered in return?


So what's in it for London City then? Can't think of anything happening in that part of the world in the next few years.:confused:

call100
6th Nov 2008, 22:12
Actually I am very near retirement and if working out of MAN or London City would consider it very strongly. ( I'll accept your apology Manrow!). I am lucky that by the time, if ever, IDs come up north I will be retired and free to ignore the need for an ID cardhttp://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/evil.gif

Actually it will not be as difficult as you think. Personally I will say no. If I am denied the right to work then the Union will have a direct dispute with the employer and will ballot for industrial action.
As we have seen in the last few days, nothing is solid in it's introduction. I believe Manchester and London Cityemployees have a dispute with their employer now as they have voluntarily signed up to the scheme.
Hopefully something will come of that. Support for them is needed. There is still a long way to go. The Government have managed to delay the implementation until after the next election. If they get back in then there will be no stopping them. If they fail then the Tories will abolish the act and New Labour will say that it's not their fault.
My God! What a poor choice of Political parties we have in the UK and not one inspiring leader amongst them.....:eek:

call100
6th Nov 2008, 22:18
Interesting to see that Manchester Airport are keen to help the Gvt round up some "volunteers".

Now who owns them I wonder? Local councils of course, 80- 90% labour controlled.

Not surprising that JS legged it up the M6 to ask for a few favours. I wonder what is being offered in return?


So what's in it for London City then? Can't think of anything happening in that part of the world in the next few years.http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/confused.gif
Manchester and LCY are getting the money to upgrade their security systems fully.....You are quite correct that they have been offered bribes. Of course had they been honourable employers they would have consulted the workforce first....Of course they are not.

biddedout
6th Nov 2008, 22:26
Ah, so its nothing to do with them being in the market for purchasing another airport then?

So when they promised their staff that in accordance with the Data Protection Act etc, biometric data would not be shared with anyone else, what they really meant was......

Now had it been LHR, JS might have found herself in the embarrrasing position of having to ask some of the Airline executives who signed the letter of objection to this half baked scheme to be her first "volunteers".:)

call100
7th Nov 2008, 09:22
Biddedout.
I Can't fault a word of your argument.......:)

Superpilot
7th Nov 2008, 11:06
What a poor choice of Political parties we have in the UK and not one inspiring leader amongst them.....

Different puppets, same hand up their arses......INDUSTRY!

Sallyann1234
7th Nov 2008, 12:36
Perhaps I'm missing something here, but why is it necessary for a legal case to be made? Isn't there a much simple way to block the scheme?

If at the two airports in question, on the first day of operation with the new ID cards a majority of the staff accidentally mislaid their cards, the airports would be shut down with pax and TV crews besieging the gates.

It's unlikely that large numbers of staff could be dismissed over such a simple matter as forgetting a card, and in any case the operators couldn't bring in replacement staff because they wouldn't have the right ID.

Surely something like this might happen?

Edit: Not that I'm promoting any sort of conspiracy of course - that would be entirely wrong and quite unacceptable!

spannersatKL
7th Nov 2008, 13:19
Sallyann
Sadly the issue is that you won't need to carry the awful thing....just be issued with it. The normal issue of an airside permit (from the airport)would be on the basis of holding one of Smith and Brown's Stazi Party ID cards....so would take a number of months to actually reissue the airside permit for everyone at the locations concerned. If on being asked to renew your airside pass you did not hold a so called National ID card then no new pass would be issued and you would be made unemployed......and this is supposed to be a Labour Government supporting the workers......I don't think so. They no doubt hoping the economic situation they have engineered will then make everyone scared for their jobs and go out and get one of these. Basically once again democracy has been put on hold by this bunch of bandits. Roll on an election to kick these idiots out.

Sallyann1234
7th Nov 2008, 13:41
Thanks Spanners - I thought there had to be a flaw somewhere.
So you must have the card, but not show it.:ugh:

oapilot
7th Nov 2008, 15:19
Here comes the even thinner end of the wedge then.

If ever we need the unions to stand together on something, it's now.

Just out of interest, as Labour are so concerned about regular access to sensitive areas, why don't they trial it out on the civil service. Not that they would ever employ "unsuitables" of course.

Oh sorry forgot, you never :mad: on your own doorstep do you.......

call100
7th Nov 2008, 16:12
Sallyann1234
We knew Manchester was up for this some months ago. Manchester ID's have been issued with a 12 month expiry instead of the normal 5 years for a while now. What they want to happen is as the ID's come up for renewal then the requirement will be for you to prove who you are on production of a National Identity card. The trial is for 18 months to ensure that they ensnare everyone. Of course it goes without saying that if you are applying for work at MAN or LCY you will have to have the National ID or you won't be employed.
Once you have the National card you can throw it into a drawer and forget it. The act even specifically states that no one (Even the Police) can demand to see it. Of course the airports will not demand to see it only request.
oapilot
You are right. To that end some of us are working very hard to maybe achieve this.
It's not easy as some of the career National Officers in the TU's are hand in glove with New Labour politicians....This all has to come from Grass roots membership.
Support is growing, but we can't rest yet..

spannersatKL
7th Nov 2008, 16:35
How about we all accept a card......after it is mandatory for every MP/lord/lady to hold one? Remember they have to be Citizens etc. this to include all present MPs/Lords/Ladies and those who put themselves up for election or buy their peerage.....shouldn't be a problem should it? Am sure there wouldn't be any one that would complain there would there. Remember some of them have access to Nukes, vote to send the youth of the nation to invade other countries, so should be enough reason for them to be correctly identified? Who's the broon chap with his finger on the button?

Oh of course I forgot, access to WMDs has never been a bar to high office has it? Its when you don't actually hold them you get illegally booted out!

hunterboy
7th Nov 2008, 16:41
The way things are going, one will have to hold a "party" card or "id card" to have access to any half decent job. Perhaps we could call it a National Socialist Workers card?

TURIN
7th Nov 2008, 19:41
Manchester ID's have been issued with a 12 month expiry instead of the normal 5 years for a while now.

Eh? I renewed mine earlier this year and it was for the normal 5 years. :confused:

------------

I wrote to my MP and asked her to make some noise over this issue. She did as asked as she is opposed to it personally.

Got a nice letter from the government which basically said - "Tough titty". :mad:

spannersatKL
7th Nov 2008, 19:46
TURIN no doubt we can say the same to Broon and his bullies after they are chucked out?

call100
8th Nov 2008, 11:50
Eh? I renewed mine earlier this year and it was for the normal 5 years. http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/confused.gif
I said for a while....Not sure when it started. I was there the beginning of September (Talking to the Home Office) they had certainly started doing 12 month renewals then. exactly how wide spread it was I'm not sure. It was pretty clear then that an airport trial would take place and things were going on at Manchester that heavily indicated that it would be them.
I only hope the Manchester and LCY workforce are up for the fight....

6chimes
9th Nov 2008, 12:48
Just to reiterate a point I made some months ago. I already hold an airside pass and another piece of identity confirmation which I need to use to go to work, it is called my passport. If when I got my passport the system was so poor that it does not actually confirm who I am and the need for another 'stazi' form of ID is needed then every country in the world should stop any UK citizen from entering their country.

Today it is the case that to go to work at an airport you will need an ID card, tomorrow you will need one to go shopping, vote, get a loan, pay a bill, go on holiday, have children ....... ..... .. . .. . .

6

call100
9th Nov 2008, 14:18
Worrying that it's not being discussed on the respective airport threads!!! :ugh:

spannersatKL
9th Nov 2008, 17:12
Well Liberty are on side....

Liberty - Protecting Civil Liberties Promoting Human Rights : 06/11/08 Liberty warns against expensive and invasive ID card scheme (http://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/news-and-events/1-press-releases/2008/06-11-08-liberty-warns-against-expensive-and-invasive-id-card-scheme.shtml)

manrow
9th Nov 2008, 20:52
I feel some sympathy with your post 6chimes!

Outright opposition to ID cards will not work, but let BALPA (supported by the membership) take the legal action to prove the point if they wish.

In the meantime considering the options and perhaps alternatives will be much more productive then all the vitriol spilt here.

call100
9th Nov 2008, 23:29
There is only one alternative!!! The Government want their subjects on a huge data base to enable tracking and total control. The Alternative is to scrap the idea. .
It's not Vitriol being spilt here as you put it. I accept that there are a few of you that do not see it as a civil liberties issue or don't care about it being such. However, there are some of us that are taking the trouble to question in depth and challenge the Government. It's your opinion that outright opposition to the system will not work...I beg to differ, It has already had some success and the fight has not ended yet.
Your argument for them is the Illegal Immigrant argument..This argument fails on all levels...Only Legal immigrants will get the card (as they do at present). Illegal immigrants will still have nothing (Thats what makes them Illegal). Too many people lump all immigrants into the illegal category because it's convenient.
Even if the case was proven, it would not be worth giving up other civil liberties for such little gain.

Bruce Wayne
10th Nov 2008, 12:50
Another issue here is that "legal immigrants" and British Citizens" are also lumped together in the same category.

Because you are a legal immigrant DOES NOT provide you with citizenship. Being a Legal immigrant give you "leave to remain" you still remain a citizen of your country of birth unless you denounce that citizenship.

Whereas, foreign nationals employed at airports are not subject to the extensive background checks that UK nationals are, due to the difficulty and complexity of a task, there remains a vast black hole of security.

It is not impossible or unlikely that a foreign national may have engaged in, been convicted of, of even been imprisoned in their own country of criminal activity, wither it be insurgency, drug offenses, theft or whatever and while having "leave to remain" in this country can gain employment at an airport with access to secure areas with no knowledge of that persons history or activities in their country or affiliations to "outlawed" groups or factions.

Therein, lies a huge security risk.

Unfortunately, we have gained a mentality of human rights that gives foreign criminals more rights than that the law abiding citizen in their country of birth. The country that they are the electoral voters, that the government is there to represent.

So the question here is that if the ID card system is applied to legal immigrants and there are no background checks to that persons prior history due to the complexity and difficulty and inability of the task with foreign governments and illegal immigrants will not be required to be issued with a card, then what is the point ?

This does nothing to enhance security. Unfortunately, with the offset of ID card issuance, then this in fact detracts from security with the misunderstanding that having been issued an ID card confirms "X" person's identity, without any cursory background knowledge.

Again, as my per my previous post, the main subjects to the ID card system and the "bolt-on goodies" the government gets from it is only to monitor and construct databases on UK nationals, their spending habits, travel patterns and all aspects of our personal lives that are quite frankly "none of the government's god-damn business."

This is being pushed through under the guise of security and immigration matters, which as we have seen have no bearing on either issue.

The Unions, the bulk of Labour support, will not go against the government on this issue . It is simply a union representatives path to destruction and loss of union representation in the NEC to stand firm against the government on the issue.

biddedout
10th Nov 2008, 14:15
Nice post Bruce.

I remember a television interview a few months ago in which Jeremy Paxman grilled a very unimpressive duty minister on this issue of non UK nationals not having criminal record checks before being issued with airport passes.

Paxman continued to press the question "how many foreign criminals are working at our airports?" The Minister had no answer and all he could do was make up some waffle about foreign staff having to go through the same security search as nationals, so "there was no security issue". Paxman let him off lightly, but it would be interesting if the same answer were asked again after we had been forced to have National ID cards.

The Minister would still not know how many foreign criminals were working at our airports.:rolleyes:

So whats the point of it other than to waste a few more billion?:ugh:

Yarpy
10th Nov 2008, 16:14
The Unions, the bulk of Labour support, will not go against the government on this issue . It is simply a union representatives path to destruction and loss of union representation in the NEC to stand firm against the government on the issue.

You need to check your facts Bruce:

NO2ID:Press Release TUC: Unions overwhelmingly oppose ID cards – contradicting government spin (http://www.no2id.net/news/pressRelease/release.php?name=Unions_overwhelmingly_oppose)

The TUC in Brighton, has pledged to resist the identity scheme "with all means at its disposal". [1] The motion was carried overwhelmingly.

This puts unions on a collision course with the government over civil liberties, and contrasts with the government spin that "unions approve ID cards" [2] issued after the Labour Party National Policy Forum at Warwick at the end of July.

The motion, from the airline pilots' union, BALPA draws particular attention to the Home Office plans timetabled for next year on to force airside workers to register on the National Identity Register for life, as a condition of having a job.

Bruce Wayne
11th Nov 2008, 16:18
I am well aware that the TUC has pledged to oppose the ID card scheme.

However, the operative words in the statement are "pledged to oppose".

What you have to remember is that The National Executive Committee or NEC is the chief administrative body of the Labour Party.

The NEC members are (As of October 2008)

Sir Jeremy Beecham (Div. IV - Labour Councilors)
Keith Birch (Div. I - Trade Unions)
Ann Black (Div. III - Constituency Labour Parties) Vice-Chair
Gordon Brown MP (Leader) VOTED STRONGLY FOR ID CARDS
Michael Cashman MEP (Div. V - PLP/EPLP)
Debbie Coulter OBE (Div. I - Trade Unions)
Jack Dromey (Treasurer)
Angela Eagle MP (Government) VOTED STRONGLY FOR ID CARDS
Michael Griffiths (Div. I - Trade Unions)
Harriet Harman MP (Deputy Leader) VOTED STRONGLY FOR ID CARDS
Dianne Hayter (Div. II - Socialist Societies)
Diana Holland (Div. I - Trade Unions)
Jim Kennedy (Div. I - Trade Unions)
Peter Kenyon (Div. III - Constituency Labour Parties)
Andy Kerr (Div. I - Trade Unions)
Paddy Lillis (Div. I - Trade Unions)
Ann Lucas (Div. IV - Labour Councilors)
Joe Mann (Div. I - Trade Unions)
Pat McFadden MP (Government) VOTED STRONGLY FOR ID CARDS
Stephanie Peacock (Young Labour)
Ellie Reeves (Div. III - Constituency Labour Parties)
Christine Shawcroft (Div. III - Constituency Labour Parties)
Dennis Skinner MP (Div. V - PLP/EPLP) VOTED MODERATELY FOR ID CARDS
Cath Speight (Div. I - Trade Unions) Chair
Norma Stephenson (Div. I - Trade Unions)
Gary Titley MEP (EPLP Leader)
Mary Turner (Div. I - Trade Unions)
Keith Vaz MP (Black Socialist Society) VOTED STRONGLY FOR ID CARDS
Tom Watson MP (Government) VOTED STRONGLY FOR ID CARDS
Peter Wheeler (Div. III - Constituency Labour Parties)
Pete Willsman (Div. III - Constituency Labour Parties)
Harriet Yeo (Div. I - Trade Unions)
Vacant (Div. V - PLP/ELP)

From the above you will note that from the NEC, every Labour MP has voted FOR ID cards. The trade union representatives have found themselves on the board of the NEC and are able to serve their unions by having influence in the administrative body of the Labour party.

If you look, there are what 12 union members on the NEC, yet 7 elected officials, however the ID card scheme has been brought into effect. if the unions were so opposed by this and had the independent influence on policy it would never have reached the "initial" implementation stage.

so yes, the TUC and other unions may well "pledge to oppose" the id card scheme, but the hard reality they have not. which is why it is being wheeled out in the manner it is.

From your post and citation, you also need to include the rest of the post...

But there are implications for everyone in employment. An astonished TUC fringe meeting on Monday evening heard from Guy Herbert, General Secretary of NO2ID [3], of the provisions in the Identity Cards Act 2006 that ministers have confirmed could mean 10 years imprisonment for industrial action that might interfere with the operation of the ID database.[4]

"Unions certainly did not approve that, even if 304 Labour MPs saw fit to vote for it. The Tolpuddle Martyrs got shorter sentences, and that was a public outrage in an era when you could be hanged for stealing goods worth a shilling," he said.

Herbert said of today's vote:

"The Home Office has almost given up pretending that its ID scheme is necessary for national security. Those involved in aviation security day-to-day don't believe it. Now the plan is that ID will confront us in the workplace - as a form of official permission to earn a living. We are delighted that the unions and their members will be ready to fight it."


The union members may wish to fight it through their representation, but the representation in the NEC have their own agenda, not yours.

If the union representatives in the NEC were serving their members views, and that largely of the populace, this would NEVER have got as far as it has.

Bear in mind this is under the same government that dealt with Hijackers of a foreign carrier to the UK by granting them political asylum.

Aviation security ? The mismanagement of policy and administration of this country by the Labour government is the single biggest threat to aviation security.

spannersatKL
11th Nov 2008, 17:07
Well said and agree......so whats to be done?
I guess that can't be discussed on an open site......should be good to see if the spooks are now looking at all posters on here to see what action is proposed??? No doubt they are already...and if so when does that become executive action against a citizen wishing to use their right of peaceful protest etc....especially when it comes up against their catch all you're either with us or you're a 'terrorist' cover......can't wait to see the sad, out of work faces at the next election.......May you live in interesting times...

Yarpy
11th Nov 2008, 19:18
I am well aware that the TUC has pledged to oppose the ID card scheme. However, the operative words in the statement are "pledged to oppose". What you have to remember is that The National Executive Committee or NEC is the chief administrative body of the Labour Party.

Good post and you make the very important point about the possibility of ten years imprisonment for strike action that interferes with the database. This, I am given to believe, was key in getting the TUC to vote against ID Cards. The motion must have been effective in get the Government to change it tactics and limit airport ID Cards to just two airports. So I would argue that TUC opposition hit home and we need to build on that.

biddedout
11th Nov 2008, 19:44
Time to call on the only Effective Oposition in UK politics.
Mr I Hislop and Mr R Bremner.:D

call100
11th Nov 2008, 21:35
Bruce. Your post is of course correct. Which is why I stated that the opposition is coming from and must swell from the grass roots membership.
Rather than hiding I believe the only protection you can have is to fight openly. If the Spooks spannersatKL fears are on the lookout then I think I may have cooked my goose already.....:suspect:
I believe that they have conceded to the opposition by making sure the 'Trials' will last until after the next Election.
Should they win then God help all of us. They will take it as an endorsement of the scheme and hit everyone very hard with a complete destruction of Civil Liberties in this country.
Ultimately the battle ground will be at the ballot box now. No doubt new battles will come from any new Government but hopefully not as dangerous as this parties cavalier attitude to the individual.
In the meantime the struggle continues.......:ouch:

Bruce Wayne
11th Nov 2008, 22:36
I see no reason why this cannot be discussed on an open site. After all, this is partly an issue of civil liberties as well as security, data protection and government expenditure. As such this not only affects us in the aviation community, but also the population of the UK as a whole.

Therefore, we have every right to discuss this openly.

In reference to government spooks, there is little to worry about on that front. From my contact base, it can be determined that the law enforcement agencies are also very wary about this issue.

1. The government has continually established that it cannot manage secure data that is confidential, even restricted data of national security.

There is not much more to be said here.

2. The ID card scheme, although government, is to be operated by private corporation, of which it is public knowledge that the key proponent of the ID scheme in Westminster, is a major shareholder of.

From the law enforcement side of things, the identities and personal data of those who work in law enforcement, those who work in covert operations, those in military departments will also have their data, personal and biometric included on the database.

Leaving aside the whole issue of the continual insecurity of government secure data, a key problem here is that the data is managed and controlled by private enterprise. and that removes the control of law enforcement over that data. Furthermore, as we have seen with government projects to privatize, these have invariably involved the purchase of private companies operating public projects to overseas companies.

In other words, who is to say that 2 years down the road, the private company operating the scheme is purchased by a foreign company, there is nothing to preclude a purchase of the company by a foreign government owned company.

Now, this is where it really does cause concern in national security. the company managing our data could well be, in the near future, owned by a foreign government.

The UK energy industry is predominantly owned and as such therefore controlled by foreign companies with government stakes, so is it not a potential problem that a private company managing the personal and biometric data of every person with "leave to remain" in the UK could fall into foreign government control.

3. Dealing with threats to national security is, for law enforcement, like looking for needle in a haystack. The more hay that is piled on the haystack, the longer and less effective the work becomes. In short, with huge amounts of data to process looking for the proverbial "needle" leaves law enforcement "behind the power curve".

The way threats to national security have been dealt with in the past has proven effective. That is intelligence, counter-intelligence and covert ops. This is not re-inventing the wheel, these methods have derived from what has proven effective and what has not.

Ploughing though data to uncover a profile that could potentially meet a profile does not resolve anything. the profile is determined by field work in terms of intelligence, counter-intelligence and covert operations. So wasting time, energy and resources looking for a possible "possible" detracts from the agencies work in what has proven effective.

So in terms of the security and law enforcement agencies, the whole issue of the ID card scheme becomes not only moot, but counter effective in terms of security.

This of course then detracts back to my previous post 1 and 2 on the subject.

Not that I wish to rehash my previous two points, but this is where the validity of the situation arises.

So, we can determine that the ID card scheme will have either no effect or detrimental effect in terms of security and immigration for this country, yet this is what is being sold to the populace and the house as the reasoning for it.

However, the cost of the scheme has been pegged by the Labour party, over the next 10 years as 5.5 billion of your UK taxpayer pounds. We are all too familiar with project cost over-runs under new Labour, the cost could well likely stretch over-all close to the 10 billion mark.

Even at 5 billion for the project, that is an amount of half a billion a year of tax-payers money to fund a scheme that is not viable under the terms of it's own premise.

Is this in itself value for money for the taxpayer?

So what is to be done ?

That is the million dollar question. Unfortunately, we have a government that will carry out it's own actions, with no regard to public opinion or scrutiny.

Even more unfortunate is that we have no effective means of challenge to the government.

THIS in itself is a huge issue. The leader of the opposition should have brought into question and challenged the scheme over its cost, effectivity, viability and general ethos of the project.

Moreover, if the opposition were in any way co-ordinated facts such as some of those brought forth in this thread would have been brought to public attention, with the attention it deserves and the challenge it deserves, this should never have made the initial trial phases.

This government has in effect destroyed the social, economic and democratic fabric of this country, helped in part by an ineffective leader of the opposition.

The only conclusive challenge to this farcical hoax of expenditure which will only serve as detriment to the very tax payers who are paying for it is on a wholesale rejection and challange.

The ball, on this one, is with the opposition. I would concur that if the unions felt strong enough on behalf of their members, they should seek to lobby the conservative party for representation and and remove support and affiliation to Labour. The very threat would be enough for a government back track.

The political shift of the unions from Labour to the conservatives for democratic representation would leave Labour financially bankrupt in less than 28 days and cause a shift of power in the Labour party that would, in effect, cease Labour governance through the power shift in equal time.

If the TUC were to announce the ending of Labour support and a political realignment with the conservatives for democratic representation over the ID card issue, the government would have no option but attempt to broker deals with the unions, if the unions stuck firm on their views and the representatives not bought off, this issue would be ended in less than a week and a minimum of 5.5 billion of taxpayers money would remain where it sits right now as well national security being enforced and civil liberties not futher eroded.

So the question is, how strongly will the unions represent their members?

(see previous post listing NEC members)

As a side note...

"Smith slammed for extremist failing" (http://itn.co.uk/news/4d0043f13091f818f8aa851727ee591f.html) - A great show of National Security !

Topslide6
12th Nov 2008, 08:00
So the question is, how strongly will the unions represent their members?

If they are not doing, then maybe it's time for the members to represent their opinions to the unions. After all, it is we who vote in a government, and it is we who pay the wages of the unions.

The closer this atrotious scheme gets, the less appears to being done. It's about bloody time that the supposed opposition to these cards stood up and, across the board, said NO!

Yarpy
12th Nov 2008, 08:03
Brilliant post Bruce. Copied to NO2ID:

NO2ID :: View topic - Airline Pilot ID discussion (http://forum.no2id.net/viewtopic.php?p=96818#96818)

call100
12th Nov 2008, 10:08
BRUCE.
As I have said before, I have met with the Home Office Officials responsible for implementing the NID system. Your post is spot on regarding everyone else's attitude to the system. Even they were not exactly enthusiastic in their discussions.
It is also correct that one of the biggest hurdles I and my colleagues fighting this are encountering is in the Union hierarchy.
As for the TU's realigning with the Tory's..Well your analysis of the outcome is spot on. However, we both know that this will never happen. A lot of senior TU officials are still fighting the battles of the 70's and 80's. I despair that they are lagging far behind in representing the members on Civil Liberty questions.
All I (We) can do is continue to fight and not let it disapear. An indication of the difficulties can be seen by looking at the Manchester thread. Nothing is being discussed on there....Sleepwalking or what....
I'll post any progress on here.....

sugden
12th Nov 2008, 12:15
My full support to all of you directly involved in fighting this proposal.

The idea of ID cards is flawed in itself. Introduction by stealth to certain types of employee is disgraceful. If it is good enough for some it is good enough for all. Or, if it is not appropriate for some it is not appropriate for anyone.

ID cards will not reduce the threat of terrorism or benefit fraud or any of the other reasons that have been put forward as justification for their introduction. Fight them to the end. The nation is with you.

biddedout
12th Nov 2008, 12:40
I heard that one of the reasons for benefit fraud is that there are significantly more NI numbers in circulation than people entitled to have them. Millions I was lead to believe. So if they cannot even keep track of a few numbers.....

oapilot
12th Nov 2008, 19:54
Quote:
So the question is, how strongly will the unions represent their members?

If they are not doing, then maybe it's time for the members to represent their opinions to the unions.

Topslide has a point. Sadly I think we can all see the way this may go. The Government has shown in the past (most recently over the promised and not delivered public referendum on the EU Constitution) that they have no morals or ethics other than those that suit and serve their own purpose. If the NEC has a similar self serving agenda, what is the answer?

The only way to make the union leaders take notice is the threat to end their power. The only way to achieve that is by mass resignation of the membership (or at least the threat to do so should they sell us down the river).

But would we? I suspect not, apathy and a quiet moan in the crewroom/hangar/pub about the injustice of it all will prove a far easier route.

I hope to be proved wrong, but speaking to colleagues about it at work the level of indifference and ignorance of the implications of this piece of legislation is astonishing.

call100
12th Nov 2008, 22:02
I hope to be proved wrong, but speaking to colleagues about it at work the level of indifference and ignorance of the implications of this piece of legislation is astonishing.
This is unfortunately correct. I have found that once you can engage with those who have no clue and explain the situation they soon come out against it. I find that those who have children are incensed when 'Contact point' is explained.
All that can be done is keep up the pressure...Hopefully the Media will at some stage take up the Civil Liberties issue big time and run a long campaign to inform. I don't hold any real hope of that happening but, stranger things etc...

Yarpy
13th Nov 2008, 06:39
I have found that once you can engage with those who have no clue and explain the situation they soon come out against it. I find that those who have children are incensed when 'Contact point' is explained.

Quite so. The problem is getting their attention in the first place. A lot of people refuse to be politically engaged and change the subject as soon as possible. One of the issues that infuriates me is fingerprinting children in schools. We object to that for our children and got it stopped at our local school. By contrast other close family members took the view that

'they fingerprint all children these days so what's the problem?'

They refuse to become engaged in the debate and I find that completley annoying.

Privacy International published this paper:

On Campaigns of Opposition to ID Card Schemes

http://www.privacyinternational.org/article.shtml?cmd[347]=x-347-61882&als[theme]=National%20ID%20Cards&headline=On%20Campaigns%20of%20Opposition%20to%20ID%20Card%2 0Schemes

In the latter stages of the campaign the debate centres around complex issues of civil liberty amongst a small minority of concerned citizens. That is where we are at just now.

Bruce Wayne
13th Nov 2008, 13:06
It would seem therefore that the problematic issue in opposition to the ID card scheme is that, in effect, the representation of the populace is not representing them.

Primarily this is down to:

1. apathy of the populace. what is the reason for this apathy ? well it can be looked at from several different viewpoints, but in short there is a disengagement between the government and the electorate.

The electorate as we can see is not effectively represented, so there becomes an apathetic view of "well, what can i do about it!" or "it doesn't matter what anyone thinks, the government will do it anyway!"

That is not democracy, that is existing under dictatorship.

So there it is. The nub of the issue. While there are members of the electorate that often quote "big brother is on it's way", what is failed to be realized is that it is already here.

2. The unions, as we see and has been evidenced, and their representatives have their own agendas to serve which is facilitated by the power base of its members and the financial authority they derive from member subscriptions. In effect, the unions are using their members to serve their own interests under the guise that they are serving their members and serve their members when it suits them.

There is no illusion that some of the larger and more renown unions are still fighting battles from as far back as 30 years ago, who's representation is still locked into the mindset of long gone issues.

Is this the representation that best suits its members ? will they start to fight civil liberties, democracy, freedom of movement, national security and so for members 30 years down the road ? the battle has already been lost.

3. MP's while we can see that there is staunch opposition to the ID card scheme, both in Labour and the opposition parties, what effective challenge has been made. Again, with such staunch opposition both inside and outside administrative government, such opposition if enforced, should have quite literally torn the government apart.

So again, where is the representation of the electorate?

Opposition within the House has been mooted due to brokering and intimidation. Intimidation not only comes down the physical threat, but also threat of loss of position, loss of authority.

Again, this reverts back to the point that opposition to a scheme that is not viable in its own terms, a huge waste of public funds in a non-viable project and the detrimental effect to loss of privacy and civil liberties, is lost by a government that brokers democracy for its own aims, which are divergent from that of the electorate.

4. Media interest. The media has not followed this up with anything of note. True there have been debates on television between presenters and government representatives, however, it must be remembered that presenters are not specialists or conversant in any specific subject. Issues raised and discussed have been put forward by researchers and passed though editorial.

Media, while considered independent is far from it. Editors have their own political views, or are directed towards specific leanings subject to the ownership of the organization. The BBC, while license fee funded is routinely brought into line by government with threats over TV licensing issues and as such has pro-government tendencies.

Again we revert to a government dictatorship, which governs freedom of speech, freedom of debate and freedom to question government spending and non-viable schemes that affect the freedoms and civil liberties of the populace.

I note that both Call100 and Yarpy have active interest in fighting this scheme, however it would seem that the fight could be a lost cause when seeking representation through those with their own agendas or cannot afford to challenge government.

Indeed, this is why the scheme has been able to reach trial phase.

The article links posted have proved interesting. I note that the challenge to the scheme in Australia as well as other countries has caused political destruction.

Unfortunately, the British public has become attuned to government control, loss of civil liberties and huge levels of public spending waste , which reverts back to point 1 above.

The timing of this issue by government is in essence excellent. With a shrinking economy, rising unemployment, rising crime rates, uncertainty in the financial sectors, falling hose prices and so on the population, the media, opposition has it's hands full already and so, in government terms this "is a good time to bury bad news".

So the concerned minority is a minority because of the current social and economic climate.

What it seems it will take is a legal challenge. The problem with this is that it will take perhaps one person to mount a legal challenge and incur the costs of such, maybe even through to the EU courts. The staff subject to the trial scheme do not have this kind of monetary capability and the process would take years.

What would be interesting and probably needed is a public debate, not with presenters representing the populace, but by informed and knowledgeable persons questioning and debating the issues with the key government proponents of the scheme.

Indeed, most likely they will attempt to decline debate, however, those groups that have been campaigning should have suitable contact base within the media to bring the very question of debate forward. As such the lack of interest to public debate and question, should it occur, should be played for it's maximum mileage that the government will not enter into debate.

If this were to come pass, I would gladly join a debate board to bring the issues I have raised here to the forefront.

Furthermore, while not being an armchair activist. I am neither armchair nor an activist. This is a matter of principle and goes to the nub of this issue of democracy and the separation in the relationship between the authorities and the citizen.

The government is NOT the country, it is the administration of the country as elected by the majority. The government is in place to serve the views and the wishes of the electorate. The populace does not exist to serve government. This is what the government fails to realize.

On a personal note, over this and other similar issues, I am in the process of becoming a citizen of another country and relinquishing my UK nationality. Due to ancestry, I am eligible for citizenship in another state. My soon-to-be wife, an NHS Cardiologist, by ancestry is also eligible for citizenship elsewhere. She, through my incredulity, is aware of the full implications of this scheme and like myself feels strongly enough to renounce UK citizenship should this scheme be brought into full effect.

For myself, the advantages of foreign nationality also include taxation benefits. Foreign national are not subject to capital gains tax for example.

Now, I raise this point as it brings forth another matter relating to the ID card scheme.

EU nationals have freedom of travel and employment throughout the EU. so where does the ID card issue have effect on citizens of EU member states moving around, traveling to or working within the UK.

It would seem that those involved with thread have the intelligence to see the very issue here at once.

To serve the purpose that the very scheme is "marketed" to serve, the ID card scheme would have to be EU wide. That is every citizen of every EU member state be part of the scheme. Otherwise, the very point of the ID card scheme is moot.

The Irish have rejected their scheme, as they did for the Lisbon Treaty. Without every EU member state included, the whole issue can only be a failure of its very own terms.

This reverts back to the "alternative" or "hidden" agenda behind the scheme, which I set forth in my primary post on the subject.

What would be an interesting point for challenge is not only MP's and unions being lobbied, but an informed public debate with the government on this issue, a strong media attention, which a heated debate would likely initiate, Union members threatening to cancel subscriptions and all proponents stating formally that on initiation of this scheme each and every one opposed to it will relinquish their UK citizenship and seek asylum from political oppression in an alternative country.

Even if the total opposed in a country of 60 million came to 200,000 that amount of people seeking political asylum from the UK would damage this country on the international stage.

An appropriate story relating to this issue:
Vetting blunders label 12,000 innocent people as paedophiles, violent thugs and thieves | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1085208/Vetting-blunders-label-12-000-innocent-people-paedophiles-violent-thugs-thieves.html)

call100
13th Nov 2008, 14:29
I have further meetings with senior TU officials lined up. If the representatives at national level don't come to the party I will be making life very uncomfortable for them and their masters.
I don't feel the fight is over. (It won't be until I'm in court and found guilty of whatever...). However, so far dogged determination is at least getting me to some areas of influence that I would not have had usually.
Bruce...;You are lucky to be able to escape...I personally have to stick it out because my better half wants to stay here. Given the option I would move away from the UK tomorrow. I don't know which annoys me most..The Government attitude or the Apathy of the people.

spannersatKL
13th Nov 2008, 15:04
Bruce, call100 totally agree, sadly the siuation is moving towards what has been described....and some might feel that more direct action will become necessary? (not that I am encouraging this) Hence my comment about the 'spooks' being involved in monitoring 'insurrection' in the ranks.......(through the monitoring of ALL e-mail, the websites we ALL visit and all Mobile/text calls, this can be done now days by virtually any official on your local council)....we are already in the situation of a dictatorship, the ID card (and associated data base) will just tie it together for these awful people.

Bruce Wayne
14th Nov 2008, 02:19
Call100, I do not normally extend such offers, as my time is rather limited, however, I would be happy to work in conjunction with other parties to produce a white paper on the subject.

Of course this has not been done, nor commissioned by anyone as yet. I have contact with a couple of shadow ministers that would likely have interest in such a document.

If this would prove interest please feel free to contact me by PM and we can exchange contact details.

It is interesting in respect of apathy towards the scheme, I would suggest a cursory look at the thread listing on this sit alone. this thread has garnered, to date, something just shy of 10,000 views, whereas debate and speculation over the Spain incident at Madrid has garnered some 661,000 views. The Ryanair bird-strike has garnered some 114,000 views.

In respect of being lucky to escape, I have lived on some three continents and about 5 countries. Aviation is a global business and as such it affords the ability to be based practically anywhere. Not so much as escaping but washing my hands of a country that allows itself to be administered by a government such as ours. True, no country is perfect however.

spannersatKL, FYI, your security and data is down to you to manage. my network is as secure as is possible, having been involved with network security issues that have involved Microsoft Research and Development, this is no small claim. There are certain back-doors written into operating systems that allow access to your computer for national security. Though you can limit what is available and what is not.

My network is 1024 bit encrypted as is everything outbound on my Internet connection. I also route through anonymous servers when i chose to and my hard drives are also encrypted. Paranoid? no just secure. You also need to learn about ports, and use a decent firewall and set it up properly. I have 4 firewalls between each of computers and the outside world, 2 software 2 hardware.

Again this is not paranoia, but security. when you understand how identity fraud is perpetrated, it is very easy to shut off as many possible areas of attack that can occur.

This of course leads back to my previous post on the issues of security of the ID scheme and the vulnerability of data.

Please do not take this as condescending, it is not directed at anyone in particular, but a general statement; Would you leave your car in a high crime area overnight, unlocked, no alarm and a laptop on the seat in full view. No? A laptop would cost what a couple of hundred pounds to replace. what would the loss of your identity data, personal and biometric data cost you?

It astounds me that so many people have sensitive data on their computers and yet are naive about security. Safe in the knowledge that something like Norton or McAffee antivrus will protect them.

This is not unlike the the government with a short sighted view over security. The people managing this scheme have no conception of how easy and how vulnerable it is and the potential damage that can occur short term and long term.

As I said before, Identity theft has been around for centuries, the reason for the quantity of routine occurrences today is that more and more personal data about individuals is held on computer, the more data, the easier it is access and the easier it is to use.

Yarpy
18th Nov 2008, 05:42
Pilots threaten to strike over ID cards - UK Politics, UK - The Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/pilots-threaten-to-strike-over-id-cards-1023098.html)

But Mr McAuslan, whose union holds its annual conference at Heathrow later this week, said he would be consulting members on the possibility of industrial action if the Government presses ahead with the plans. "It may come to an industrial dispute," he said. "We would want to avoid that. We would want the Government to think again about the compulsory nature of it and think again about the whole scheme. The Government has said previously that ID cards will be voluntary but the indications are that if you choose not to have a card you will not get an airside pass."

Excellent! That's just the approach that is required.

call100
18th Nov 2008, 11:04
Hopefully they will vote to do something.....I notice the Government spokesperson is still spouting the same old mantra. I think at the end of the day only large scale industrial action will be effective to finally nail the coffin lid down.
The other TU's are becoming embarrassing now....


Bruce Wayne
I have PM'd you.

golftangofox
18th Nov 2008, 12:46
Hi everyone, I’m a new poster on this board but have been following this particular debate for a while and with great interest.

FYI, I am a Trade Union Rep with a strong opposition stance to implementation of the scheme, not only for aviation workers but as a whole. Unfortunately grass roots opposition is not matched by those higher up the Union food chain.

We have been advised that because this is already an act of parliament all that the Union hierarchy will do is ‘engage’ with ministers. If this was Tory legislation we would have coaches organised and placards in our hands! A bit of civil unrest did for the Poll Tax after all.

The white paper issue is interesting (Bruce Wayne) but would it be effective? I just wish the bloody *Trade Union movement would get its arse into gear over this.

*The ones that are affiliated to Labour, note – BALPA are not.

Consider this: The electoral commission figures reveal that Labour has received approx £30 million in donations from the Trade Unions since 2005 – 90% of its cash donations! Why do we continue to bankroll them? We have the reach and the clout that NO2ID (Bless 'em!) lack. Let’s question the government’s policy on this in a big way. Mobilise the movement, awake the nation and let’s try to save our freedom and liberties. Yeah, fat chance, I know.

Another point to consider: The big problem we have is that we're required under current EU law to have an ID cards scheme and an ID database that will mesh with a European-wide one, with biometric data and DNA samples. Lisbon Treaty Section 3 of article 69 gives the EU power to force Britain to adapt ID cards without our parliament being able to reject!

Welcome to the brave new world, but as call100 would say; ‘The fight goes on’

itsresidualmate
18th Nov 2008, 13:00
Good luck to all who oppose this ID card pantomime. I assume the only way to give these cards any weight will be to make it a criminal offence not to carry one. I don’t fancy getting a criminal record when all I’ve done is popped out to buy a pint of milk in the morning and forgotten to take my card with me.
And the thought of being treated like a criminal by having my DNA & fingerprints taken just to keep my job makes my blood boil.

manrow
18th Nov 2008, 20:58
But Mr McAuslan is conducting a campaign without consulting the membership in advance I believe.

Does he have the membership support or merely the activists?

golftangofox
19th Nov 2008, 00:40
Quote: Mr McAuslan the general secretary of BALPA, said he would be consulting members on the possibility of industrial action if the Government presses ahead with the plans. “It may come to an industrial dispute,” he said. “We would want to avoid that. We would want the Government to think again about the compulsory nature of it and think again about the whole scheme. The Government has said previously that ID cards will be voluntary but the indications are that if you choose not to have a card you will not get an airside pass.”

You would obviously have to consult the membership and ballot for any industrial action. Leaving aside the legal issue for a moment, this action would only be taken if there was a majority mandate from the membership.

As regards the campaign he cannot be expected to consult every member and will rely on the activists to gauge the strength of feeling amongst the membership.

I am sure he has their support, only wish the other Trade Unions were as vocal in their opposition & condemnation.

llondel
19th Nov 2008, 04:21
You don't need a strike if everyone refuses to do the paperwork and other stuff for an ID card. You just turn up at work as normal and if they refuse you entry then you register your protest, tell the management you tried to get in but failed and then either go home or stand outside with a sign to tell people why their flight is going to be cancelled. If the airport will let you in with your current airside pass then make the flight.

How does it work for those who aren't based at MAN or LCY but have to fly in and out occasionally? Are such crew supposed to also have ID cards?

golftangofox
19th Nov 2008, 12:13
llondel: You don't need a strike if everyone refuses to do the paperwork and other stuff for an ID card. You just turn up at work as normal and if they refuse you entry then you register your protest, tell the management you tried to get in but failed and then either go home or stand outside with a sign to tell people why their flight is going to be cancelled. If the airport will let you in with your current airside pass then make the flight.


There is a problem with taking individual action instead of collective action.

The Goverment's cunning plan is to coerce 'soft target' individuals on a one by one basis. You will not need to have an ID until your current airside pass expires. As we know these passes all have different expiry dates, so in theory, if you renew your pass today it will be another 5 years before you will need to go onto the ID database to get airside. If an individual decides to have a one person protest, then i'm afraid the planes will still fly!

After saying that, this is the current timetable the Goverment wishes to use:

1/ 21 November 2008: Home Office issues draft rules on ID card trial at Manchester and London City airports. (Should be interesting)
2/ 25 November: Home Office starts issuing ID cards for foreign nationals.
3/ March-May 2009: Regulations on trial scheme debated by Parliament.
4/ Autumn 2009: First airport staff to be given ID cards.
5/ 2010: ID cards made available to young people for the first time.
6/ 2011-12: Public invited to register for ID cards.
7/ 2017: Vast majority of the population enrolled on ID card database.

There is a reason why they are doing this by stealth. (Airport by airport, individual by individual) Strong collective opposition in the aviation industry would be successful. Thats why it's so important that we engage and stand with those initially affected at MAN & LCY. I just hope that they are up for the fight, but I have my doubts.

We will have to wait until Friday when the draft rules are published, but I expect when we dissect it we will find lots of anomolies.

oapilot
19th Nov 2008, 17:26
Lisbon Treaty Section 3 of article 69 gives the EU power to force Britain

So that would be the same EU constitution that this perfidious Government promised us a vote on before the last election, and then denied us once they'd got back into power.... :yuk:

oap

qwertyuiop
19th Nov 2008, 19:32
Don't think that treaty has been ratified yet. Lets hope it never is!!

golftangofox
19th Nov 2008, 23:08
qwertyuiop: Don't think that treaty has been ratified yet. Lets hope it never is!!

You are correct, and you have the Irish to thank for that. Treaty of Lisbon was signed in December 2007 and was planned to have been ratified in all member states by the end of 2008. However the Irish electorate rejected It in June 2008. Unfortunately it could still come into force before the 2009 European Elections. Trust me, most states have or will ratify in their parliamentary processes. Job done!

So that would be the same EU constitution that this perfidious Government promised us a vote on before the last election, and then denied us once they'd got back into power.... http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/pukey.gif


Correct, despite Labours manifesto promise we never had a referendum in the UK because we would have returned the wrong answer to the Goverment. Labour knew this so denied you the vote. Remember the adage: If you don't like the answer, don't ask the question.

In fairness I have tried to read the Treaty and gave up! It's written in 'legal speak' and anyone without a good grounding in this gobledegook would struggle. I don't think many politicians understand it either. So it's a bit like 'don't worry about the small print, just sign at the bottom'.

In the end you will have to do what your European masters tell you.

Remember when we were the masters and the elected Goverment our servant? Those days have gone.

S78
21st Nov 2008, 17:29
ZANU Labour has published a consultation document about ID cards.

The less palatable bits include fines of £125 (to be enforced by civil courts) for failing to update your details, refusing details, not letting them know about a change of name when you get married or failing to notify them if the card is lost/stolen:mad:

The cards will cost more than £30 (we knew that) and individuals who have sex change ops can have 2:ugh:

Even the homeless cannot escape, they can use a park bench or bus stop as their address:hmm: - assuming they can find the £30+ needed to pay for one:E


So....... I'm going to have to pay for a card that I don't want or need, and will be fined if I don't tell the government everything they want to know.

Wonder if I'm too old to emigrate?


S78

golftangofox
21st Nov 2008, 19:35
The less palatable bits include fines of £125 (to be enforced by civil courts) for failing to update your details, refusing details, not letting them know about a change of name when you get married or failing to notify them if the card is lost/stolenhttp://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/censored.gif


The Identity and Passport Service has announced that an ID card holder could face a fine of up to £1,000 if they fail to keep their personal details on the National Identity Register up to date. It will start at £125 and could rise to £1000 for persistant offenders.

The £30 fixed fee for the cost of the card is set only until 2010. Most people are likely to pay much more once the large scale issuing of cards rolls out in 2011 or 2012.

Fines will also apply if cardholders fail to report their cards lost or stolen, and will be enforceable by the civil courts.

I suppose no real surprises, as a lot of this is covered in the 2006 act.

However, as if these punitive, revenue raising measures are not enough, just think where all this is heading. Britain will clearly become an unrecognisable snooper/police state.

How far in the future do you think it will be before Jacqui Smiths Stasi; the so called 'Community Accreditation Officers' start handing out on the spot fines for non compliance? :eek:

People really should start getting angry about this completely unnecessary tool of oppression.

llondel
22nd Nov 2008, 00:11
It looks as though you can be fined for refusing to provide details, but I can't see anything that prohibits you from sending in the required details but refusing to provide the payment for the card. :}

oapilot
22nd Nov 2008, 11:04
True, although when your airside pass comes round for renewal you will be assimilated into the collective mass ranks of the unemployed. Remember, resistance is futile.....:bored:

golftangofox
22nd Nov 2008, 13:02
The rules include measures forcing airside workers at the two 'trial airports' - MAN & LCY to enrol for an ID card when they complete the criminal records check needed to get an airport security card. (This will be from next Autumn).


True, although when your airside pass comes round for renewal you will be assimilated into the collective mass ranks of the unemployed. Remember, resistance is futile.....http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/wbored.gif
How true and how depressing.

Don't forget though, for your convienience the fines, can be issued by post, email or fax.

Refuse to pay the fine or update your details? The Home Office have made it clear that repeated failures to keep an entry on the national identity register up to date could ultimately be enforced by bailiffs being sent round to seize property.

Interestingly, the Government has not yet made it a crime to refuse an ID. However, as has been mentioned, we will have to join the mass ranks of unemployed if we work airside and refuse to go onto the register.

The Gov make it clear that they intend to avoid the creation of ID card "martyrs", by levying no penalty on those who refuse to register for the national identity card database in the first place.

Well, there might be some aviation "martyrs" if anyone feels as strongly as I do about this.

PT6A
22nd Nov 2008, 19:05
At the company I work for we dont have airside ID cards, only a company ID - (we are not based from an airport, as we are a leasing company)

However, I show up at any airport show my company ID and then go airside - now and then I also have to show my licence but it's no headache.

So, would airlines be able to just stop requiring their employees to obtain an airport airside pass - and just issue a company ID instead?

PT6

spannersatKL
23rd Nov 2008, 17:32
golftangofox
Also by making it a 'civil' offence (is there such a thing) they are in fact putting you at a disadvantage.......you will be unable to have your day in court as you would if this were a normal criminal offence....with associated press interest etc...all that would be affected if you don't pay is your name goes on credit black lists, county court judgement against you etc and the Baillifs might turn up, you will then have an inability to get a Mortgage etc.....

Bascially they are a doing it this way as they are afraid of doing the job properly.........not even the Stazi would have done it this way!!!

One day Gordon/Jacqui (can't spell your name properly can you), one day the people of this country will wake up to your nasty regime....

golftangofox
24th Nov 2008, 14:27
At the company I work for we dont have airside ID cards, only a company ID - (we are not based from an airport, as we are a leasing company)

However, I show up at any airport show my company ID and then go airside - now and then I also have to show my licence but it's no headache.

So, would airlines be able to just stop requiring their employees to obtain an airport airside pass - and just issue a company ID instead?
PT6


Simple answer - NO!
It is a Department For Transport (DFT) stipulation that all employees who are based at an airport must have an airside pass if they require access to work in airside areas. Airlines or any other companies who operate airside would not be exempt from this.

Even if this was not the case, a visitor pass would require you to be escorted at all times. It would also render the current criminal disclosure check redundant, as anyone with a conviction could get around this by just obtaining a day pass all the time.

spannersatKL: Also by making it a 'civil' offence (is there such a thing) they are in fact putting you at a disadvantage.......you will be unable to have your day in court as you would if this were a normal criminal offence....with associated press interest etc...all that would be affected if you don't pay is your name goes on credit black lists, county court judgement against you etc and the Baillifs might turn up, you will then have an inability to get a Mortgage etc.....

Bascially they are a doing it this way as they are afraid of doing the job properly.........not even the Stazi would have done it this way!!!

One day Gordon/Jacqui (can't spell your name properly can you), one day the people of this country will wake up to your nasty regime

spannersatKL, I see you are fully up to speed with the programme!

Thankfully, we all seem to be singing from the same hymn sheet. The big problem though is revealed in your last sentence; "one day people of this country will wake up"

By the time the public awake from their slumber and there really is a big outcry over the many pitfalls: the enormous cost £5.4 billion and rising, the expense to the individual, nuisance of having to update all your information for the rest of your life under the threat of financial penalty , ease of cloning, theft, loss of data, people losing the card and being fined etc. Most importantly, the vast intrusion into our lives and the loss of civil liberties. IT WILL BE TOO LATE. You will need the card for literally everything, you will not be able to function without it - fait de compli.

CONF iture
24th Nov 2008, 18:13
... ease of cloning, theft, loss of data, people losing the card and being fined etc ...
... but the solution is already here chip implant (http://fr.youtube.com/watch?v=Keo2TR1Zouw) for your own "security" and comfort ... of course !

6chimes
25th Nov 2008, 11:11
I have been told that those in MAN will not have to pay for their ID cards.

Is this true?

6

call100
25th Nov 2008, 20:51
No........The 'Trial' will be cost neutral for the two participating airports and the guinea pigs....
It's amazing how some people can only see the monetary cost of the ID and miss everything else...

reverserunlocked
26th Nov 2008, 01:51
With every day that passes I loathe this government more and more. Lies about Iraq, lies about the EU treaty, lies about tax, lies about VAT and amongst other things lies now about this ID card. It's nothing more than a new roll of red tape to keep people in cosy public sector jobs and a whole new set of 'crimes' to unwittingly commit when you forget to tell them you've moved house etc. And still feckwits vote for this lot. I really seriously am considering wishing this fair land au revoir.....:ugh:

6chimes
26th Nov 2008, 09:29
[QUOTE]No........The 'Trial' will be cost neutral for the two participating airports and the guinea pigs....
It's amazing how some people can only see the monetary cost of the ID and miss everything else.../QUOTE]

I am not sure what I have missed as I think my previous posts show in quite succinct language my opposition to the ID card, based on my suspicion of this government not because of any financial concern.

I was asking the question because I was told by a colleague of mine who works at MAN that he believed he was not going to have to 'buy' his identity and it would be provided for him at no cost. I was asking the question because if that was true it raises concerns that the trial is being manipulated to ease its introduction.

6

call100
26th Nov 2008, 14:52
6chimes....~
Sorry, re-read my post...It was badly put and not directly aimed at you.
Sorry once again.
I actually find that the question I get asked most initially is how much will it cost. Well financially not much. In terms of loss of civil liberties a vast fortune.....

spannersatKL
26th Nov 2008, 14:56
Should be interesting if BKK action comes to UK!!!!

babymike737
26th Nov 2008, 16:48
With every day that passes I loathe this government more and more. Lies about Iraq, lies about the EU treaty, lies about tax, lies about VAT and amongst other things lies now about this ID card. It's nothing more than a new roll of red tape to keep people in cosy public sector jobs and a whole new set of 'crimes' to unwittingly commit when you forget to tell them you've moved house etc. And still feckwits vote for this lot. I really seriously am considering wishing this fair land au revoir.....:ugh:
Join the club mate! Me to!!!!!

golftangofox
26th Nov 2008, 19:21
For what it's worth there is an opportunity to comment on the secondary legislation proposed under the ID Cards Act 2006. http://www.ips.gov.uk/identity/downloads/NIS_Legislation.pdf

This is some of what the Home Office consultation document states:


This is a public consultation and anyone who wishes to do so may
comment. However, those organisations that commented on the National
Identity Scheme Delivery Plan 2008 and any organisations that may be
involved in the early roll out of ID cards at airports are in particular invited to comment.


This is a 12 week consultation starting on Friday 21st November 2008 and
closing on Friday 13th February 2009.

Any comments should be sent to:
Robin Woodland
Identity Cards Act Secondary Legislation Consultation
Home Office
Identity and Passport Service
Allington Towers
19 Allington Street
London SW1E 5EB

Comments may also be sent by email to: [email protected].
If commenting by email please include the words “consultation response”
in the subject title.


There are 97 pages to trawl through but pages 29 & 30, sections 5.1 to 5.14 are specific to us in aviation. You should take particular note of the section 'Designation Of Documents' it states:


If an airside worker in the category specified refused to apply for an ID
card then they should not be issued with the criminal conviction
certificate necessary to obtain an airside pass.

5.14 We welcome comments on the
proposal to provide for the roll out of
identity cards to different groups through
commencement orders and on the draft
designation order that would link the issue
of identity cards to the issue of criminal
conviction certificates for airside workers.

Please feel free to send them your comments, but do you really think it will make any difference? :ugh:

biddedout
26th Nov 2008, 22:38
So am I understanding this correctly?

They want to stop UK nationals from working airside by refusing release of a Criminal Record Check if they object to an ID card, but it will be business as usual for foreign workers who of course do not need criminal record checks to work airside regardless of whether they are obliged to have an ID card. So they do not know how many foreign criminals work airside now, and even with ID cards, they still will not know how many foreign criminals work airside. Meanwhile, those UK workers who are able to prove that they do not have a criminal record will be prevented from doing so. So if enough people with CRC's passed object to the ID cards, we would potentially have more criminals woking airside than we do at the moment.. :ugh::ugh::ugh:

Whalerider
27th Nov 2008, 01:35
So The Government Tells Us Id Cards Will Help Security.

German Nationals Have Id Cards - Didn't Stop Bader Meinhof Gang In The Seventies.

Spanish Nationals Have Id Cards - Didn't Stop The Madrid Bombings.

This Is Nothing But A Scandalous Waste Of Money To Keep Government Employees In A Job.

jxk
27th Nov 2008, 06:43
Do we really believe that no-one will be clever enough to clone one of these ID cards and be able to put corresponding info on the database. I think not.

Mick Stability
27th Nov 2008, 08:19
With this 'government's' record on IT projects, I wouldn't be at all surprised if a million fictitious Labour voters suddenly materialise when the ID card becomes a mandatory prerequisite to voting.

That is should we ever be allowed again to elect a leader of this country.:oh:

Welcome to the Soviet Union reborn.

call100
27th Nov 2008, 08:45
So The Government Tells Us Id Cards Will Help Security.

German Nationals Have Id Cards - Didn't Stop Bader Meinhof Gang In The Seventies.

Spanish Nationals Have Id Cards - Didn't Stop The Madrid Bombings.

This Is Nothing But A Scandalous Waste Of Money To Keep Government Employees In A Job.

At talks with Home Office officials they actually stated that it had nothing to do with security despite the Government spin used at times.


Do we really believe that no-one will be clever enough to clone one of these ID cards and be able to put corresponding info on the database. I think not.


A Dutch IT expert has already cloned a biometric ID and produced the evidence. He did it just to prove it could be done. However, his evidence is being ignored as it does not suit the Governments case.

spannersatKL
27th Nov 2008, 14:38
Mick Stability
We didn't actually 'vote' for Gordon 'Mugabe' at the moment......he 'assumed' the job after edging the previous incumbent out over a period of 10 years and threatening any opposition. He then bottled out when it came to an election if you remember?

Still he will be a short serving unelected Prime Minister when he is finally given his rightful marching orders. Unless as you say the oppression we are suffering from increases and they invoke the 'special powers' they have given themselves under various Acts of Parliament and Orders in Council the past few years; then decide the current situation makes an election impossible and defers it at the time etc....(as seen in other dictatorships).....

Arkroyal
27th Nov 2008, 14:59
We didn't vote for his predecessor 'Teflon Tone' either.

A system which delivers a landslide to someone who gets 25% of the votes possible has no mandate,IMHO.

It is quite clear that these thugs are determined to roll this out to the general public,who'll be led to believe that we airside workers were willing volunteers. They'll forget to mention that we had Hobson's choice. No ID, sorry, you can't get an airside pass, therefore kiss your job goodbye.

How has this country come to this.

spannersatKL
28th Nov 2008, 14:29
The oppression increases...ID cards fiasco (managed by Home Office).....and this week.....Police (run by Home Office) to buy 10,000 Tasers, (that should cattle prod a good number of the population when they are performing their legal right to protest)......MP arrested for doing his job.......(by Police acting on Home Office instructions). To think this isn't even in Zimbabwe.....Of course all denied by the idiots in charge!!!! You couldn't even write it as fiction could you.....

Black Knat
28th Nov 2008, 15:38
Ironic though it is, the failing economy could be a blessing in disguise for the country. When the reality of job losses, repossessions etc start being felt next year it could be what gets the current 'goverment' out of office. As they say, opposition parties don't win elections-goverments lose them. It's then remotely possible that change will take place.

6chimes
29th Nov 2008, 10:21
Only if there is an election before the ID card fiasco has been rolled out nationwide or there will only be a few 'Gordonites' allowed to vote.

6

Litebulbs
4th Dec 2008, 11:27
At last, the first legal step against ID cards!

BBC NEWS | UK | DNA database 'breach of rights' (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7764069.stm)

spannersatKL
4th Dec 2008, 14:52
Quote from lackey Jackies department this moring on BBC R4 (Today), 'no one will be forced to hold an ID card'...........der....what about all those at MAN / LCY?

Good to see division in the top ranks lately!!!

call100
4th Dec 2008, 19:15
Quote from lackey Jackies department this moring on BBC R4 (Today), 'no one will be forced to hold an ID card'...........der....what about all those at MAN / LCY?
Actually she is right (Although it pains me to say it) You are not being 'forced' to hold a National ID even if you are in aviation. You will be required to produce one to obtain the Disclosure Scotland criminal checks. If you don't have one you will not get the check and in turn will not get the Airport ID. However, You will not be forced to get one, it will be by choice. Having made that choice you will have to suffer any consequences.
I agree with the majority who believe that its Hobsons choice. In the Governments mind though it does not constitute force or compulsion.
Hope that makes sense.:}
The fight goes on......:ok:

biddedout
4th Dec 2008, 19:25
I see lackey jaqui now sports a Stalinesque moustache in the latest Guardian cartoons.. :)

call100
5th Dec 2008, 08:21
She deserves the portrayal. She is the most dangerous person in Britain at the moment.
She is more of a threat to our liberty than anyone or thing at large in the world today.

Yarpy
5th Dec 2008, 10:37
The Identity Cards Act secondary legislation Consultation is at:

http://www.ips.gov.uk/identity/downloads/NIS_Legislation.pdf

On Page 32 it states:

5.12 The requirement for airside workers to obtain a basic criminal record check is already a legal requirement imposed by a direction under the Aviation Security Act 1982 by the Secretary of State for Transport. Thus if the criminal conviction certificate is designated through this Identity Cards Act order, the requirement to have an ID card will depend both on the Identity Cards Act designation order and also on the Aviation Security Act direction. If an airside worker in the category specified refused to apply for an ID card then they should not be issued with the criminal conviction certificate necessary to obtain an airside pass. The Identity and Passport Service will be working with the 3 criminal record checking agencies (Criminal Records Bureau for England and Wales, Disclosure Scotland and Access Northern Ireland) to ensure that the designation process will fit with the way that they either currently, or in the future, could provide criminal conviction certificates for people who are required to obtain one to work airside at an airport.

golftangofox
5th Dec 2008, 11:48
LitebulbsAt last, the first legal step against ID cards!

BBC NEWS | UK | DNA database 'breach of rights' (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7764069.stm)

Good news indeed. I hope that this is an important milestone in the fight for our civil liberties. Briefly:

Two men from Sheffield had their DNA and fingerprints retained by the police despite being convicted of no crimes. They won their case in the European Court of Human Rights against the UK Gov for breaching their human rights, with judges saying keeping the information "could not be regarded as necessary in a democratic society,” The decision from the 17 judges was unanimous.

Three cheers for the European court of human rights!:ok:

(Remember the UK has the largest DNA Database in the world. 4.5 million UK citizens are on it including 857,000 innocent men, women & children).

This little bit sums it up really: “the home secretary, Jacqui Smith, said she was "disappointed with the ruling" So the Home Secretary is disappointed at the need to maintain our human rights!

We should really try to organise some sort of celebration for this victory in the battle against the creeping totalitarian State.

Now lets do it for the ID database. It will not be easy but if everyone was to say no we would win, it's as simple as that. "The fight goes on"

Litebulbs
6th Dec 2008, 09:31
I am a member of Unite the Union, the union that now has 2 million members in the UK. I remember listening to the Amicus National Secretary, Derick Simpson, who was giving a speech about the benefits of having a union of Unite's size. One of the primary benefits was the power to lobby the Government effectively. There are a couple of things that we can do -

1. Ballot the membership to find out whether the membership are if favour of ID cards.

2. Take that result to Ms Smith and ask her opinion on that result and what if anything, she is prepared to do?

3. When she ignores it, start looking at a Union co-ordinated protest up to and including removing the money that we give the Labour Party each year.

If each Union affiliated to the TUC did this in a co-ordinated manner in support of the resolution (BALPA) passed this year, she may have to listen.

Or she may not!

call100
8th Dec 2008, 01:19
You are correct. However, Getting the your Union to do anything is proving to be a big Challenge. The push must come from the grass roots as we don't have any faith in the National Officers.....At the moment we are trying to get the unions to hold a conference for all representatives from all major airports. If this is achieved we will let you know..
Meanwhile can I ask you to pressure your local reps into action and into supporting the call for a conference.

Yarpy
15th Dec 2008, 12:40
Unite to Press Employers on Government Powers to Raid Homes of Employees Working on ID Card Programme:

Unite to Press Employers on Government Powers to Raid Homes of Employees Working on ID Card Programme (http://www.prnewswire.co.uk/cgi/news/release?id=244985)

Unite, the UK's largest union, is pressing employers for answers to their role in agreeing to powers for the homes of employees working on the ID card programme to be entered and searched.

This follows the disclosure that five companies working on the ID cards scheme have been asked to sign agreements that appear to provide for homes to be searched for up to 25 years without a search warrant.

Unite has campaigned for many years against invasion of privacy in the workplace, and spying on employees by monitoring of telephone, computer use, email and Internet use, CCTV, drug testing. Now the union is complaining about being kept in the dark about this latest threat to employees' privacy, which could involve a breach of the Information Commissioner's Employment Practices Code of Practice

Thank heaven someone is awake out there.

golftangofox
15th Dec 2008, 16:54
Yarpy: Unite to Press Employers on Government Powers to Raid Homes of Employees Working on ID Card Programme:
Thanks for the link. This bit sums it up for me:

Peter Skyte, National Officer of Unite, said:
"It is sadly ironic that a system purportedly being established to protect human rights and civil liberties is itself responsible for destroying those rights and liberties." Says it all!

The thing is we are only just starting to see an awakening from Unite. We need to start a national campaign beginning with ID, and I truly believe this will happen now.

Are we to blithely accept the inevitability of a National ID database replete with personal details, DNA samples, mobile phone and internet logs etc? We're being led towards a society with surveillance every bit as insidious as that of communist china.:suspect:

Unite will not be able to ignore the growing grass roots opposition to this. Bring the fight on!

Yarpy
15th Dec 2008, 18:13
Are we to blithely accept the inevitability of a National ID database replete with personal details, DNA samples, mobile phone and internet logs etc? We're being led towards a society with surveillance every bit as insidious as that of communist china.

Quite. We are fighting to retain our way of life. None of this stuff is very 'British' to say the least. The loss of our national identity surely makes it harder to fight for what we believe. If we don't have any idea about what we stand for how do we fight for our values and beliefs?

Depressing stuff but the sooner we kick this grim Government in the gutter where they belong the better.

42psi
15th Dec 2008, 18:30
I thought this timely piece from the Manchester Airport "Plane Talk" glossy newspaper might be of interest and relevence at this point.

This is repeated verbatum from the headline article on the front page of issue 252/December 2008.

My apologies for it's length but I thought it better to quote in full rather than use "selective" quotes which might be considered biased :E

I would add that from my conversations it seems there are more of the "what have you got to fear/if you've not done anything/can't see the problem" around than those who object :{

‘In November the Home Secretary announced that Manchester and London City airports would work with the Home Office as part of the first wave of the Critical Workers Identity Cards (CWIC) Scheme.

The Government intends to introduce identity cards for all airside workers in phases. Starting with an 18-month evaluation period in autumn 2009. The Government and industry will assess the benefits and achievements of the scheme and consider how the process can be further developed for future phases.

Using identity cards as a single consistent means of proving identity across airports will bring real benefits to employers, employees and the public. They will help bring faster, cheaper and more joined up pre-employment and security checking processes, giving holders a highly secure and convenient identity document as well as being valid for travel to Europe for British citizens.

Geoff Muirhead CBE, Chief Executive of Manchester Airport Group said “Since no additional costs will be placed on the industry and a simplified process of applying for airside clearance is established, identity cards now offer real benefits to businesses operating at Manchester Airport. For individuals, identity cards offer the opportunity for greater portability in terms of applying for new jobs within the industry where airside clearance is required without the need to repeat lengthy security checks.”

The Identity and Passport Service (IPS) will work with Manchester Airport to start introducing the requirement for new airside employees to have an identity card from autumn 2009.

From 25th November 2008, the UK Border Agency will start issuing compulsory identity cards to foreign nationals who apply for further leave to remain in the UK within certain categories. This will help keep the UK borders strong, providing additional protection against illegal immigration and illegal employment.’

call100
15th Dec 2008, 18:42
The reason for Manchester signing up to the scheme is because it is owned by the local authority. The Labour run council put pressure on the airport to sign up for the trial. Purely political. They deserve everything that is coming their way....
42psi
It's amazing that the airport's own paper is actually quoting verbatim from home office documents. The management at Manchester couldn't come up with anything original if they tried. They have proven themselves to be weak and easily manipulated.

golftangofox
15th Dec 2008, 19:54
Yarpy
Depressing stuff but the sooner we kick this grim Government in the gutter where they belong the better.


Experience hath shewn, that even under the best forms (of government) those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny. — Thomas Jefferson

Surely the Labour Goverment must realise that they will not be in power indefinitely? This is why I can't understand their enthusiasm for state control today, because who knows who will have this control tomorrow? In a short ammount of time the apparatus of democracy will not be there for us to change our circumstances or protect any freedom we may have left.

After 9/11 to protect us from 'terrorism' the Gov passed a series of laws that also undermined our basic liberties. Bear in mind that since Labour came to power in 1997 they have created over 3,600 new criminal offences!

42psi I would add that from my conversations it seems there are more of the "what have you got to fear/if you've not done anything/can't see the problem" around than those who object http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/boohoo.gif
To those who keep intoning that tired old cliche "If you have got nothing to hide, you've got nothing to fear I would say this. I myself have plenty to hide. Trouble is, none of its illegal.

Also tell that to those arrested and detained without trial. Tell that to those innocents imprisoned all over the world - tell it to the millions of victims of totalitarian regimes.

They gave the police powers to enter private homes without warrants in 1933, Germany. They abolished search warrants. The government said 'if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear' from an inspection. The truth is that the innocent actually do have something to fear from state intrusion into their private lives. :(

Call 100 - Correct, and don't forget that MAN & LCY Airports were also persuaded by the Gov agreeing to fund the trial. The cards supplied free and a nice little earner of £500,000 towards improvements in security checks. It's clear to me that the trial is being manipulated to ease its introduction.:suspect:

Bruce Wayne
16th Dec 2008, 10:18
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 (http://cmiskp.echr.coe.int/tkp197/view.asp?action=html&documentId=843937&portal=hbkm&source=externalbydocnumber&table=F69A27FD8FB86142BF01C1166DEA398649) 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.

ShotOne
17th Dec 2008, 19:15
MAN's "Plane Talk" quoted by 42psi bills itsself "newspaper for the manchester airport community" . More like "govt spin-rag", with its jumble of questionable statements and demonstrable falsehoods straight from Labour Party HQ; 1."No additional costs.." Really?? It is clear this scheme will cost billions of pounds. In the short term they don't want to be seen to be passing it directly onto airlines but as taxpayers we will most certainly be paying for it. 2. "A single consistent means of proving identity across airports..."How can this be true when they are only issued at LCY and MAN? 3. "Valid for travel to Europe.." In your dreams , pal!

How depressing that as mundane a publication as an internal airport newsletter is now written by party political spin doctors.

spannersatKL
17th Dec 2008, 21:45
Well if "Valid for travel to Europe.." is one of the wonderful reasons for holding this objectionable document and is used to try to sell it to staff then it ain't worth the plastic it'll be stamped on? Have a passport thanks for that and in most countries you don't need it in any case.....Can drive from Hamburg to Madrid passing the borders at 80 mph and never show any documents now days......havn't the spin doctors in Knutsford International actually been to europe lately?

golftangofox
18th Dec 2008, 20:12
Bruce Wayne, I read your well constructed posts with interest, unfortunately I have to concede that you may be right with regard to not being able to rely on the Trade Unions.

Recently I have been so frustrated that I feel my time and energy would be better devoted to a more productive cause.

The Gov must be laughing at us while we swallow their lies and reward them to the tune of millions in donations. Our reward is for them to make a potential nightmare become reality. How did we end up here? What a joke.

As you have pointed out before, the simple truth is if the National officers felt as strongly and acted upon our behalf, they could threaten to remove support to the Gov over this issue. If we stood firm the Gov would have to back down and billions of pounds of our money would be saved as well as our personal freedoms that took centuries to develop.

The Union can engage in these pretend debates with the Gov as much as they like, the real business of course continues apace.

Is there nothing short of actual civil unrest that will change anything, for all our self-important "debating" and hot-air?

Witness Greece as a forewarning of what could come to all Western societies in the coming years, when the security forces use lethal force to stifle anyone who dares protest. The anti-terror laws, snooping bills and Jacqui Smith's 10,000 new Taser stun guns aren't there to 'protect' us after all.

Hope I feel better in the morning.:{

Bruce Wayne
19th Dec 2008, 13:41
GTF

Indeed, I concur that the investment of energy, time and effort to bring legitimate question, informed debate and democratic consideration to such a scheme is exhausting and also an ever decreasing circle.

However, this really is a productive cause.

The comments of Peter Skyte, UNITE are indeed valid. Furthermore, I would like to add:

"It is sadly ironic that a system purportedly being established to ensure security, not just within aviation, but nationally is itself responsible for destroying security, not just within aviation, but nationally."

What really concerns me is that not if the government is laughing up it's sleeve at the aviation industry, but at the nation as a whole,but if the government actually believes that this system will be effective under it's own terms.

If the government actually believes this system will be effective, then there is a considerable cause for concern that the government is negligent, naive, crassly moronic and incapable of listening to experience and specialist knowledge on a subject.

However, we have seen through the course of New Labour administration of this country that is indeed the case in many decisions.

So we have to then consider the converse of this subject, that the government is knowingly undertaking a project at vast public cost that is not viable under its own terms and is subject to potential illegality under the EUCHR.

Again, we have seen this has been the case under other instances of government actions.

These two points revert back to the nub of the issue, that is government dominance over the individual and the lack of control of authority over the individuals their personal information and the manner in which it used.

It is highly unlikely that the government *will* back down on this issue through democratic process. The amount of money spent to date, the personal fortunes to be made by those connected with policy and involvement in the scheme, the inroads into government control over the lives of each individual are to great to be given up. Furthermore, there is *no* democratic process to this scheme.

While the economy of this country has spiraled government spending and borrowing has increased, despite economic reviews that the economic policies are unrealistic and detrimental to the economy of the country, both in the short term and the long term.

It would therefore be an issue that during a time economic volatility the spending of a minimum of half a billion pounds a year on a scheme that is un-viable would be brought to bear.

Again, this is not the case.

The public is paying for a scheme that it does not want, is un-viable, a democratic abomination, in essence illegal under the EUCHR, an infringement of civil liberties, detrimental to the security of the country both to the individual and the country as a whole and will have to pay personally on top of funds paid through taxation and will be penalized both financially and judicially for non compliance.

It is nothing short of disgusting that airside workers are subjected to the lack of personal security both in their positions and their personal lives under threat of their employment.

*Bear in mind my previous comments regrading the insecurity of data and the ease of ability to obtain this data for nefarious purposes and the possibility of someone using such a device, at an airport say, where it KNOWN that people will have data insecure and available*

In simple terms, people with airside passes are required to have ID cards. A reader in a bag, walked around an airport will be able to access that data. As such, the very security of airside passes is now null and void. And the security of that individual and the environment in which they work is now breached.

Again, I reiterate, people who engage in nefarious actions will not be using their identity, they will use someone else's.


The problem here is that there is no single representative body acting against this.

We have:
BALPA, who represent airline pilots - Fighting ID Cards
GASCo - No comments on ID Cards
BBGA - No Comments on ID Cards
CAA - Government Body
Individual Unions - Members Opposed, But Union Affiliation to Labour
NO2ID - General. Not Aviation Specific.
Liberty - General. Not Aviation Specific.
Privacy International - General. Not Aviation Specific.

As you can see, there is only one party challenging the issue on aviation grounds, and that group represents Airline Pilots.

Airline Pilots are opposed to this for a multitude of reasons, some of which have been addressed in security issue threads such as this here (http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/354230-stn-security-declares-war-pilots-5.html).

While each individual group is fighting its own battle, the war is being lost because there is no cohesion or combined effort to challenge this, if there is any effort at all, over and above lip-service (IE the Unions).

A further point to this is that the political opposition it seems has very little ability to act against the government.

Damian Green, the shadow immigration spokesman is opposed to the ID card scheme and has already addressed the opposition by airport workers. However, as we saw a couple of weeks ago, Damian Green was arrested with out warrant, had his offices searched and was subject to confiscation without warrant under the guise of national security.

Damian Green was doing what he has been elected to do, bring the government to question over policy and it's actions and bringing to the public view and to the house, government failings, particularly those which the government attempts to bury.

The duplicity, falsehoods, misdirection, mendacity, and outright affront to democracy that this matter signified indicates the lack of ability of challenge to government.

While I do not condone public disorder, it would be apparent that the only cause of challenge left is for mass rejection of the scheme. IE every airport employee to refuse submission to the card.

Manchester and London City would effectively be brought to a standstill as no-one would have appropriate access to carry out their job. But this would have to be brought as a combined challenge, not for each individual.

That would take action of a union representative to ballot his members over the id card scheme and propose action against this scheme.

The upshot for this would be that the Union officials higher up would *have to listen* to their members or risk division or subsequent a subsequent break away union, causing the loss of membership.

It has long been a concern of mine that there is no representative body acting for aviation matters either in Europe of the UK and the potential integration of such an association.

While you state that Greece could be a forewarning of government control over opposition, you have to bear in mind that that has *ALREADY* happened in the UK.

Blair changed the position of Lord Chancellor under the reform act of 2005. This ultimately changed our constitution.

In 2005 it was made illegal to protest within 1km of parliament. Again this changed the rights of the individuals of the UK. You are now required to have permission to protest.

New Labour have sought to extend the period of time to be held without trial - 42 days, despite a rejection and the buy-off of ministers to move the proposal, it was rejected by the Lords.

Jacqui Smith has also advised the NUJ that "the police can "restrict or monitor photography in certain circumstances".

Counter Terrorism Laws have been used extensively by the police, even local councils to criminalize activities and to engage in surveillance of individuals for reason that are not even classified as civil offenses.

Again, this goes back to the nub of the issue over ID cards in that the government's control over the individuals of this country and their data is detrimental to security and to democratic process.

Perhaps the only significant manner in which the whole industry can oppose this is by mass action.

ShotOne
19th Dec 2008, 16:14
Direct action; well, short of blocking a taxiway, first step is for all of us to write to our MP; House of Commons (Name in phone book)
London, SW1A 0AA or WriteToThem - Email or fax your Councillor, MP, MEP, MSP or Welsh, NI, London Assembly Member for free (http://www.writetothem.com)

...for a start!

Bruce Wayne
19th Dec 2008, 16:22
golftangofox,
call100,
yarpy,
litebulbs,
42psi

I have PM'ed you, (Yarpy it is rejected as you dont accept PM's).

Arkroyal
19th Dec 2008, 16:41
GTF:Surely the Labour Goverment must realise that they will not be in power indefinitely? This is why I can't understand their enthusiasm for state control today, because who knows who will have this control tomorrow?The only explanation is that, having won this round, they intend eventually to remove the process by which they can be kicked out of office! A certain A Hitler pulled that stunt about 72 years ago.

My MP's getting my protest on his desk Monday. He's known to support the fight against this dreadful attack on millenia of freedom in this country.

ShotOne
20th Dec 2008, 18:29
Pleased to hear it, arkroyal. What this thread shows is that pilots are highly skilled at analysing the detail of a complex issue...but sometimes lamentably poor at doing anything about it! Lets not allow this to be such a case.

Perhaps we could take a leaf from Captain Pratt, BA who has suggested in the balpa mag, a boycott of the scheme. Hear hear! And I'd be delighted to hear some practical suggestions on how we could put this into effect.

Bruce Wayne
21st Dec 2008, 08:05
ShotOne

That is a fair observation, however there is a substantial issue in this in that while the scheme is being rolled out through two airports, and that it has been premised that while "No-one will be forced to hold and ID card" airport employees that have air side access in line with their employment, EG Pilots, will be required to have an ID card or be denied access to their jobs, it would come forward that this is an aviation related issue.

In that:

Air side staff will be required to have an ID card.
Air side staff will be subject to the risk of having their biometric data stored.
Air side staff will be at risk to have their data mined and nefariously duplicated
Air side staff will be required, against their wishes to be party to lack of security against their wishes.
Air side staff will have no control over the data, how it used and how it is promulgated in either their professional lives or personal lives.
Air side staff will be subjected to having their data stored, without having criminal conviction which is a violation of rights under EU law. Ref: S. and Marper v. the United Kingdom.

So this would in effect be challenged through the minister for aviation as this issue, toward us relates to an aviation based matter.

However, it is the home office that is mounting the attack on our civil liberties, and as such, while there are many areas that this issue would be challenged under, the challenge is divided.

Again, you have to look at the manner in which New Labour has changed the constitution of this country and how the failings of many public offices continue unabated.

New Labour has proliferated ministers under various subjects headings under the guise of serving the "population" there are many benefits to the government.

Lets take for example a recent government failing that has been in the news, where does the responsibility lie? there are so many crossovers between potential ministers responsibility that no-one takes responsibility and business carries on without repercussion.

Of course there are many areas of benefit to the government in such proliferation, however, lets keep this focused rather than go off on a political tangent.

Retuning to this issue, while the matter as above concerns aviation, we have to challenge this on an aviation issue. As such, other areas that are represented have to challenge this through their individual challenges.

It's the old rule of divide and conquer. The government has divided the potential challenges while the administrative sector that is responsible remains unchallenged.

So the way forward is to make a stand. As you pointed out, pilots are highly skilled at analyzing the detail of a complex issue. Capt.. Pratt has indeed suggested a boycott in the BALPA mag, however there are many other pilots who are not BALPA members. Indeed, many air side access employees are not pilots, and are also opposed to the scheme. We have seen in this thread that are union representatives who are opposed to this scheme.

So while we have been divided, we need to unite all the air side access people to a coordinated effort. To voice the concerns and to effectively boycott the scheme as it is un-viable, a security risk in itself and a waste of public money.

golftangofox
21st Dec 2008, 16:54
Bruce Wayne


golftangofox,
call100,
yarpy,
litebulbs,
42psi

I have PM'ed you, (Yarpy it is rejected as you dont accept PM's).


I'm afraid I can't find any PM in my inbox, It may have been inadvertently deleted? can you please re-send?


We have seen in this thread that are union representatives who are opposed to this scheme.

So while we have been divided, we need to unite all the air side access people to a coordinated effort. To voice the concerns and to effectively boycott the scheme as it is un-viable, a security risk in itself and a waste of public money.

You are of course correct in that the most effective form of opposition to the scheme implementation in the aviation sector will come from a collective and unified voice. It does, as you point out affect a large number of employees working for a number of various companies, in different roles that all require an airside pass to work.

With the above in mind, the best way to oppose this should be through the Trade Union movement. It has the resource, power and leverage to make a difference, if of course it has the will. After all it is responsible for 90% of Labour party cash funding.

Unfortunately some National Officers are still living in the world of 1970s disputes and cannot see beyond Labour – good, Conservative – evil. The adage about dinosaurs springs to mind. It should be simple, if something is wrong, it is wrong and party politics should not come into it. I can assure you that if this was Tory legislation it would certainly be opposed by the movement.

Anyhow, how can anyone defend a Government that decides to use anti-terrorist legislation on targets such as the entire population of Iceland (banks), those who dissent at party conferences, peaceful protesters, and to arrest opposition MPs for doing their job?

Remember the BALPA motion that was carried overwhelmingly by TUC delegates? It pledged to resist this scheme with all means at its disposal, including consideration of legal action to uphold civil liberties.

BALPA to their credit led on this, but the other unions who are affiliated to Labour are doing very little to support their members veiws on the issue.

Without wishing to become too political I have to point out that in the UK we have the most restrictive laws on Trade Unions in the western world. Although these laws were bought in by the Conservative Government they have not been scrapped despite 11 years of Labour Government. Trade unions which seek to defend jobs, services or industries face massive penalties, including the freezing of union funds (sequestration) or even receivership - all designed to stop unions from functioning effectively on behalf of their members, or in support of members of other Trade Unions.

With regard to ID cards, there is little that the Trade Union movement can do to oppose a Government Act. Any action would be deemed a political dispute and would be unlawful. The only legal way to take action is by industrial dispute. To do this the dispute would have to be against the employer, not the Government. This is why those who are initially affected at MAN & LCY may need to consider this course of action.

The Government will do whatever it needs to coerce us onto their databases. None of us should underestimate the difficulty we will have in opposing the Governments will.

Bruce Wayne
23rd Dec 2008, 14:03
Well it seems that we have the collective intellect, interest and capacity to mount a formative opposition to this scheme, I have PM'ed all of you interested.

I agree that the best way to oppose this would be through a trade union movement, however, as you have pointed out, the political affiliation between unions and the labour party are a problem. There is no doubt that those higher up the union chain will not change their political affiliations, nor put aside the ghosts of their past either. Nor are they likely to jeopardize their positions which afford financial and power security.

Furthermore, your point in that a trade union action would be deemed a political dispute, therefore illegal, is both apt and relevant.

I have been mulling this over for a few days in addition to the PM's i have recieved from you, Yarpy, 42psi, desperate, call100, litebulbs, spannersatKL and have PMed you all back the same message.

I think i see a potential way forward for us all to act in a combined manner, and soon as i have heard from you all back on that mail then perhaps we can initiate a collective opposition.

fireflybob
16th Feb 2009, 10:21
More on this topic:-

Identity Cards (http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/362407-flights-risk-pilots-refuse-accept-demeaning-id-cards.html)