BALPA against ID Cards - TUC Congress

[call100]

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......

[biddedout]

I see lackey jaqui now sports a Stalinesque moustache in the latest Guardian cartoons..

[call100]

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]

The Identity Cards Act secondary legislation Consultation is at:

http://www.ips.gov.uk/identity/downl...egislation.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]

LitebulbsAt last, the first legal step against ID cards!

BBC NEWS | UK | DNA database 'breach of rights'

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!

(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]

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]

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]

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

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]

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.

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

[Yarpy]

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]

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

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]

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]

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

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.

[Bruce Wayne]

Apologies for my lack of input of late, travel demands of work !

Having had a catch up on the posts i have missed it is good to see that there has been:

1. A few more hits on his thread, which indicates additional interest on the subject matter. however, again this subject has some 14,000 hits, whereas take for example the thread on the A340 being damaged at Toulouse has had over a quarter of a million hits.

just goes to show that perhaps the majority interest is in reading about damage *after* it has occurred rather than preventing it in the first place.

2. Additional interest on the subject matter from a Unite union member and representation on the issue. However, what must be borne in mind is the points i made in my previous posts concerning union opposition (see posts #124 / #161 / #164 / #169 / #178 )


There have been aside from the above points some key issues that have been raised on the subject matter of the ID card scheme:

The European court of human rights found in favour of the plaintiff's in S. and Marper v. the United Kingdom a breach of human rights in their DNA being retained without conviction.

While it is implied that no-one will be forced to hold an ID card, it is implicit that to gain airside access in order to undertake one's employment will require the issuance of an ID card.

Ergo, while you are not forced to have an ID card, you have to make the choice of an ID card or your job.

While the EUCHR has found a breach of human rights in the holding of biometric data without criminal conviction, the implication here is that the UK government is doubly countermanding your human rights by way of you having to accept your human rights being violated to retain your job.

A point here i would like to consider is that there is a requirement for a criminal conviction certificate to be provided in order to be issued with an airside pass. There is no specific requirement noted as to when the certificate is issued. That is to say, if i am already in possession of a CRB check certificate then that should be sufficient for the issuance of an airside pass.

You can go to any police station, pay the 5 pounds, or whatever it is right now, and have a CRB check done and be issued with a certificate confirming no conviction. This would then be acceptable for the issuance of an airside pass WITHOUT the ID card.

So already we have a loophole in that people that require airside access to perform the duties of their employment can obtain the requisite documentation to be issued with an airside pass without having a national ID card. !

While in Holland, someone has already created a system to record biometric data, this has also been achieved in the UK. The purchase of electronic components readily available in retail outlets enabling the reading of biometric data is available. See my previous post. The UK based trial resulted in the data being red from biometric passports from a range of up to 10 feet.

So, having this equipment in a bag and walking through an airport, where the vast majority of people will be holding passports, will enable the holder to gain a vast amount of passport biometric data in a short time.

Again, this reverts back to my previous post that while taking on the identity of another person has been around for centuries, the prospect becomes ever easier the more data on a person is stored at a single point. THIS IS WHY IDENTITY THEFT IS INCREASING EXPONENTIALLY.

And again, if a person is to engage in nefarious activities, they wont be using their identity to do so, they will be using yours.

As I pointed out in a previous post, the cost of the ID scheme has been pegged, by the government at 5.5 billion over 10 years. A cost of half a billion per year. We all know the government track record on project overspends.

The NHS IT system was a declared cost of 6.2 billion over 10 years. To date the anticipated cost is toward the 31 billion mark. This is for a computer network system that there was no clear understanding of what it would do, how it would work, or even if it was needed or workable.

This is not dissimilar to the ID card scheme, as per my previous posts, it is clear that the ID card system is in fact inviable under its own terms and premise.

Under the current economic situation, the government simply cannot spend money it doesn't have on a scheme that is un-viable. a cost of a MINIMUM of half a billion a year on a scheme that is unworkable and in effect a violation of rights under EU law as per S. and Marper v. the United Kingdom.

In essence, every person that requires airside access in order to perform the duties of their employment has to, under the ID card scheme, have their rights violated in order to maintain employment. So we have a challenge here that can be leveraged by the aviation community to prevent this scheme coming into full effect.

We also have a challenge under the current economic status to challenge government expenditure, however, this needs to be acted upon through your MP.

We as an aviation community have the ability to stop this white elephant in it's tracks by way of a challenge on the following points:

1. the scheme is un-viable.
2. the scheme is detrimental to national security.
3. aviation security is paramount, this scheme negates that security
4. the costs involved are too vast for detrimental effect.
5. the scheme is rendered invalid under the terms of the EUCHR.

[ShotOne]

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]

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]

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]

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.

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]

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

...for a start!

[Bruce Wayne]

golftangofox,
call100,
yarpy,
litebulbs,
42psi

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