home column latest column archive website design contact

Losing My Identity

Is there any such thing as a coincidence in politics? In a week when the 3 rd reading of Labour's proposed ID card bill took place in the House of Commons, I have witnessed several key events which could be seen as very convenient for the Government. There have been numerous reports this week in the media about fraudsters going through rubbish bins in order to steal people's identities, creating a sense of worry amongst the general public, and absolute panic amongst those Members of Parliament who hide embezzled funds in a biscuit tin behind their dustbin. It also happens to be National Identity Fraud Prevention Week (a catchy title if ever I heard one) so what better time to cast a vote on the very thing which could rob us of our identities altogether.

The key source of this media uproar is a report by a leading criminologist Martin Gill, of Leicester University , which warns that as a nation we adopt a lax attitude towards identity fraud and fail to protect ourselves. He also goes on to say that a large proportion of identity theft is opportunistic; carried out by individuals rather than gangs of human traffickers. I am quite sure that Professor Gill's report is completely unbiased, and that it offers a valid insight into a growing problem in the UK today, however the chances are that the general public won't read it. Instead they will be served it as a dish prepared by the media.

Take one slice of Professor Gill's findings, season with a pinch of media sensation, stir in some political spin, and serve while hot. All of a sudden people start believing that old Mr Steel from next door is planning to take out a credit card in their name, and assume that anyone who comes with 100 yards of their dustbin is trying to sell their maiden name to an Estonian prostitute. In a study earlier this year Which magazine claimed that 25% of the nation has been affected by identity fraud in some way, and that 70% of their readers would favour a move towards ID cards. Now whilst I don't consider this a true indication of the current problem in the UK , statistics such as these can alter public opinion and frighten people into submission, especially on a key issue such as public liberty.

The main arguments for identity cards centre on the idea of preventing illegal immigration and illegal working, along with aiding anti-terrorism and reducing benefit fraud. On paper this would seem to be a good idea, however it remains to be seen how the system will be enforced, especially as we wont be required to carry the card in public at all times. With regard to illegal immigration, I suspect it will just make things slightly more inconvenient for the traffickers; simply another document to forge for the benefit of the employers who actually care to check.

The major argument against is that a massive database of personal information would be created giving government the power to extend surveillance of the population. There has also been suggestion that the government has sounded out large organisations (including the major banks) with a view to charging them for access to this database, purely for reference purposes of course, however these rumours have since been fervently denied. In addition concerns have been raised over the cost to the public - around £30 per head as a starting figure for those of us who work for a living, and significantly less for those who choose to spend their weekdays watching Philip and Fern.

The ID card is intended to hold data in two distinct ways. The first is the printed part of the card which includes a photo and a selection of personal details; the second is the chip containing biometric information such as a person's fingerprints or iris or facial scans, which are unique to the individual. The obvious danger with holding that kind of data is that if someone's card does somehow get stolen, a criminal gang will have access to his/her details for life and can potentially implicate them in future crimes.

In a rather worrying twist to the tale, it has also emerged that biometric information is not yet 100% reliable, and that one in 1,000 people could be wrongly identified. The key problems (so far) include: men who go bald; anybody with a vitamin deficiency; people with brown eyes; and manual workers whose finger prints wear away. In short, if you are a brown-eyed balding touch-typist who suffers from scurvy and doesn't eat fruit or vegetables then you are screwed.

Cast your mind back to the last time you had to visit an airport, and recall that feeling of being treated like livestock, where your passport is the only thing that separates you from the guy next to you. You are told where to stand by armed goons, metal boxes beep at you because you wear a watch, and you are forced to deal with people who handed over their personality upon acceptance of a job. This is the future under the ID card system; this is ASDA in 5 years.

© Ben Yates | Contact | My Facebook  | Valid HTML | Valid CSS