National Database?

[LA]

As we all know one of the many policy ideas of the Labour Party is the National Database.

The National Database would hold the details and fingerprints of every British citizen.

So, what do you guys think about it?

[Tantal]

As we all know one of the many policy ideas of the Labour Party is the National Database.

The National Database would hold the details and fingerprints of every British citizen.

So, what do you guys think about it?

I think it's a severe governmental intrusion into the lives of the citizenry. If someone's arrested, fine. If someone abides by the law, why should they have to submit fingerprints to the almighty government? What's next? A DNA sample collected at birth? Tracking devices implanted........to protect children from kidnappers of course. Cameras installed in every home.......you know, to protect women from abusive husbands. For every intrusion the government makes there will always be an excuse, no matter how weak, for doing it. Where will it stop?

[Midas]

As we all know one of the many policy ideas of the Labour Party is the National Database.

The National Database would hold the details and fingerprints of every British citizen.

So, what do you guys think about it?

Pretty much the same as Tantal. A massive and totally unwarranted intrusion into people's privacy which will have a minimal impact on crime in comparison to both the huge cost and the security risks involved.

Just imagine if such a database was hacked or data was lost; how many people's personal and private details would be offered for sale on the internet, probably within minutes, for use by criminals? Computer technology, advanced as it may be, still can't handle such a major database with any degree of safety, especially when you consider how many people would have access to it.

Any government which feels it's got to go to such lengths to 'protect' its citizens is paranoid and is trying to create a climate of fear in order to try to justify its own actions.

[JAMC]

As we all know one of the many policy ideas of the Labour Party is the National Database.

The National Database would hold the details and fingerprints of every British citizen.

So, what do you guys think about it?

It is a terrible, terrible idea.

[LA]

FOr the sake of balanced arguments I shall mention the good side.

If you have everyone on a national database two things will become easier.
1. Illegal immigrants can be easily proved to be illegal immigrants thus we can kick them out of the country
2. With everyone on a database you can easily track criminals. That would not only reduce costs in relation to the police force (per case) it would also keep more criminals off the streets.

Of course for the second one to be effective we must build more jails.

[Midas]

FOr the sake of balanced arguments I shall mention the good side.

If you have everyone on a national database two things will become easier.
1. Illegal immigrants can be easily proved to be illegal immigrants thus we can kick them out of the country
2. With everyone on a database you can easily track criminals. That would not only reduce costs in relation to the police force (per case) it would also keep more criminals off the streets.

Of course for the second one to be effective we must build more jails.

Yes, if you could guarantee that the original documents which were used to enter data into the national database could be relied upon. But the fact is that you can't; I'm assured it's very easy to obtain either fraudulent or completely false documents which current checks won't reveal as being so, and if these are then used as a basis for a false entry in a national database, what use is it to anyone?

[LA]

Yes, if you could guarantee that the original documents which were used to enter data into the national database could be relied upon. But the fact is that you can't; I'm assured it's very easy to obtain either fraudulent or completely false documents which current checks won't reveal as being so, and if these are then used as a basis for a false entry in a national database, what use is it to anyone?

The information would be entered for people upon birth.
For all immigrants, the information they subject to the Immigration Dept. would be used.

[JAMC]

For all immigrants, the information they subject to the Immigration Dept. would be used.

...which would presumably be false.

My main objection to this scheme is that it, in conjunction with the legal "innovations" that will accompany it, open the door to the arbitrary use of power by governments.

Allowing governments to easily profile the population, applying their own criteria of "normal" and "dangerous" (or "undesirable"), tracking their movements and associations, and obtaining prosecutions on dubious standards of evidence is a recipe for deeply rooted state repression.

[LA]

...which would presumably be false.

My main objection to this scheme is that it, in conjunction with the legal "innovations" that will accompany it, open the door to the arbitrary use of power by governments.

Allowing governments to easily profile the population, applying their own criteria of "normal" and "dangerous" (or "undesirable"), tracking their movements and associations, and obtaining prosecutions on dubious standards of evidence is a recipe for deeply rooted state repression.

Indeed, we could sit here typing many cynical comments, however, I do not find that productive.

There movements would not be tracked, so why you stated that I do not know.

The database would contain name, nationality, age, criminal record, finger prints, description of appearance and a photograph (which would be the same as a password photo).

The database would merely allow the police to track criminals faster, and make sure immigrants have admission to Britain.

[JAMC]

Indeed, we could sit here typing many cynical comments, however, I do not find that productive.

Indeed.

There movements would not be tracked, so why you stated that I do not know.

Because I work with databases for a living and know the life cycle. The qualititive value of a database increases incrementally with the number of different areas of coverage. Ultimately they exist to answer questions posed of them. For each unanswerable question, another area will be brought into the fray.

The database would contain name, nationality, age, criminal record, finger prints, description of appearance and a photograph (which would be the same as a password photo).

Assuming you have a passport or driving license, all this information is already known to seperate government departments. Along with countless other records stored within other public and private sector databases we encounter on a daily basis. As I alluded to above, it is when the information becomes cross-referenced, appropriately keyed and easily queryable from a central point that the true power emerges. I don't object to organisations holding appropriate data to facilitate their day-to-day operations, but I do object to data being gathered centrally in the manner proposed, and used for a purpose other than its original intention.

The database would merely allow the police to track criminals faster, and make sure immigrants have admission to Britain.

The database itself can be made to do anything. Tracking criminals and tracking immigrants are just the two purposes that we're being told about because they're politically the most beneficial.

[LA]

Assuming you have a passport or driving license

Yes - I believe everyone should hold a passport.

and used for a purpose other than its original intention.

It will only be used in the sense of crimes.

The database itself can be made to do anything. Tracking criminals and tracking immigrants are just the two purposes that we're being told about because they're politically the most beneficial.

So can a moose!

The database will serve as a crime aid, nothing else.

I did not realise they were going to use it for immigrants... I am merely stating why I would want it.

[Midas]

The information would be entered for people upon birth.
For all immigrants, the information they subject to the Immigration Dept. would be used.

So until everyone that's already alive has died, what's going to be done about registering their details other than relying on either easily forged or fraudulent documents or incorrect data already held in some other database?

As far as immigrants are concerned, JAMC has it about right.

[JAMC]

It will only be used in the sense of crimes.

The database will serve as a crime aid, nothing else.

I did not realise they were going to use it for immigrants... I am merely stating why I would want it.

Considering that you're not personally writing the cheque for this thing, I'm more concerned with what the people who are will use it for.

It would be reckless to get lost in the "wouldn't it be good if we could...." without at least examining the "what could happen if we did....".

[JAMC]

It will only be used in the sense of crimes.

Just to be clear, any unintended usage is out of the question as far as I'm concerned - even this.

[LA]

I am aware of the many problems and flawes. All I am doing is advocating why it is a good idea as no one else seems to think it is good.

[JAMC]

I am aware of the many problems and flawes. All I am doing is advocating why it is a good idea as no one else seems to think it is good.

I don't think these potential upsides have passed people by - they're just outweighed in most people's reasoning by the negative aspects.

[LA]

I don't think these potential upsides have passed people by - they're just outweighed in most people's reasoning by the negative aspects.

The cynical views of many, I agree with them, however, it does annoy me when people fail to accept the good aspects.

[Midas]

The cynical views of many, I agree with them, however, it does annoy me when people fail to accept the good aspects.

I don't think it's a case of people failing to accept the good aspects of proposals such as a national database, or at least selected parts of it. However as JAMC points out it's the fact that the potentially negative aspects far, far outweigh those good aspects, rendering them rather irrelevant.

[LA]

I don't think it's a case of people failing to accept the good aspects of proposals such as a national database, or at least selected parts of it. However as JAMC points out it's the fact that the potentially negative aspects far, far outweigh those good aspects, rendering them rather irrelevant.

JAMC's argument is based on the assumption the police or those with access will abuse it - An assumption is not a solid argument.

[Kingy_0]

As we all know one of the many policy ideas of the Labour Party is the National Database.

The National Database would hold the details and fingerprints of every British citizen.

So, what do you guys think about it?

My own opinion:
It's not really a practical solution and will probably end up like many of the computer related ventures that the Labour government has made so far...

Such as the NHS database; another interesting little gimmick. Which costs enormous sums of money and will ultimately serve as another means exploiting the nation's personal information to cyber-criminals.

This database will probably only serve as a mere replica of the NHS one and will be containing much more personal information than anything stored on the NHS database.
And with the given track record of the emphasis placed on data security by our government.
I most certainly would not trust them with archiving all my details on a database!

It won't take long before another USB drive is found in a pub car park with personal data on it, or another 'password' protected CD-ROM found within a laptop.

Simply put it's intrusive and more damaging to the nation's interests than the 'possible' benefits to be provided by it.

So from me it's a flat no... it most definately shouldn't be considered!

Negatives of such a Database:

FOr the sake of balanced arguments I shall mention the good side.

If you have everyone on a national database two things will become easier.
1. Illegal immigrants can be easily proved to be illegal immigrants thus we can kick them out of the country
2. With everyone on a database you can easily track criminals. That would not only reduce costs in relation to the police force (per case) it would also keep more criminals off the streets.

I always hate being really negative about something, but since it is Monday and I'm feeling cynical here's my takes on the negatives.

The creator of DNA fingerprinting Prof. Sir Alec Jeffreys considers a venture such as this to be intrusive and discriminatory.

You've all probably read the article but here it is:

BBC - Privacy fears over DNA Database

It displays to me the dangers of what the government could do with our data in a singular archive accessible at any given time.

Professor Jeffreys told the BBC: "With the current DNA database of criminals, there's been a recent extension to include suspects who've been convicted of no crime at all - I think on the assumption that at some stage in the future these people may commit a criminal offence."

"In my view that is discriminatory."

"My other concern is that some forensic scientists are now beginning to look for physical characteristics; genetic determinates of hair and eye colour, ethnic group as well - to get some indication of the physical appearance of a person where you have no clear suspect. "The use of this sort of very private genetic information by the police does fill me with very considerable concern."

It is a risky tool which to some extent could be used in determining ethnic profiling, something that would be dangerous if a succeeding government could have access to if Labour were to be ousted from power.

(lol, I suppose I've made this sound almost like an apocalypse. Sorry feeling cynical and pessimistic today it's that Monday feeling )

[LA]

This is not good.

I dont like the idea of the database - that kinda makes it hard to argument for it...

Are there any blind Labour supporters here?

[Midas]

JAMC's argument is based on the assumption the police or those with access will abuse it - An assumption is not a solid argument.

It may not be solid, however based on the way that existing commercial and government databases are constantly attacked by hackers, and the fact that governments and the police in general are far blame-free in invading people's personal freedom without warrant, it wouldn't surprise me one little bit that if such a database was in existence right now, this government couldn't resist dipping its fingers in to see what they could find.

And who's to know what kind of totalitarian government we could end up with in the future, especially if the British public continue with their pattern of having a few moans about things, followed by a mute acceptance of whatever gets thrown at them. Such a government would almost certainly use such a database to disable potential political opponents, and that's to say nothing of the potential misuse by the thousands, or even tens of thousands, of people who had official or unofficial access.

[LA]

It may not be solid, however based on the way that existing commercial and government databases are constantly attacked by hackers, and the fact that governments and the police in general are far blame-free in invading people's personal freedom without warrant, it wouldn't surprise me one little bit that if such a database was in existence right now, this government couldn't resist dipping its fingers in to see what they could find.

Technically such a database does exist; for all charged with criminal offences, regardless of the judgment.

However, the Labour government want everyone to be on the database.

And who's to know what kind of totalitarian government we could end up with in the future, especially if the British public continue with their pattern of having a few moans about things, followed by a mute acceptance of whatever gets thrown at them. Such a government would almost certainly use such a database to disable potential political opponents, and that's to say nothing of the potential misuse by the thousands, or even tens of thousands, of people who had official or unofficial access.

Again with the assumptions

[Kingy_0]

Technically such a database does exist; for all charged with criminal offences, regardless of the judgment.

However, the Labour government want everyone to be on the database.



Again with the assumptions

We cannot be truly objective on the negatives of such a database to be implemented because as you yourself have said, the database in question does not exist. Therefore we are lacking actual feedback on the caveats of such a system.
This rules a lot out of a objective counter argument so therefore we resort to some extent to assume/presume/ponder on the possible negative outcomes of what could entail if such a system were to be put in place. (Myself included in that)

And in this instance I feel that this database would serve as a tool waiting to be exploited, if it was developed and implemented.
It would be a tool that would be in place if a succeeding party ousted the current Labour government from power and could be used to control and monitor the majority of the population or on the switch side the minority groups that reside within Britain.
Through speculation I could only imagine this to be dangerous, because such a database could aid in removing 'less desirable' groups from society. Imagine if a extreme national party were to get into power and have access to details of these minority groups.

[LA]

We cannot be truly objective on the negatives of such a database to be implemented because as you yourself have said, the database in question does not exist. Therefore we are lacking actual feedback on the caveats of such a system.
This rules a lot out of a objective counter argument so therefore we resort to some extent to assume/presume/ponder on the possible negative outcomes of what could entail if such a system were to be put in place. (Myself included in that)

And in this instance I feel that this database would serve as a tool waiting to be exploited, if it was developed and implemented.
It would be a tool that would be in place if a succeeding party ousted the current Labour government from power and could be used to control and monitor the majority of the population or on the switch side the minority groups that reside within Britain.
Through speculation I could only imagine this to be dangerous, because such a database could aid in removing 'less desirable' groups from society. Imagine if a extreme national party were to get into power and have access to details of these minority groups.

Image if a Christian Socialist party came into power and resolved all of Britains problems, removed all the criminals, tracked down those in need of help.

wow, the database looks pretty good now...

But none the less it is an evidence-lacked assumption. Not an argument.
But I understand the possible problems of a database, but it would be nice if someone were to specify a problem not based on assumption.

[Kingy_0]

This is not good.

I dont like the idea of the database - that kinda makes it hard to argument for it...

Are there any blind Labour supporters here?

Feel free to display any objective negative about this database you may feel I have overlooked... And I'll more than happily look further into the evidence informed counter argument of such a database being implemented.

[LA]

Feel free to slap any objective negative about this database you may feel I have overlooked... And I'll more than happily look further into the evidence informed counter argument of such a database being implemented.

One huge problem with it is that it is actually illegal under EU law.

Citizens have a right to a private life.

[Kingy_0]

Would you be kind enough to tell me under which act/legislation or provide a hyperlink I would like to have a look at it.
(I'm not doubting what you have said, just intrigued.)

Oh I changed the wording of my prior comment to 'display' instead of 'slap' to make it less abrasive, as it wasn't my intention for it to be so.

[Tete123]

A passion for liberty has determined the decisive political debates of our history, inspired many of our defining political moments, and those debates, conducted in the crucible of great events, have, in my view, forged over time a distinctly British interpretation of liberty —— one that asserts the importance of freedom from prejudice, of rights to privacy, and of limits to the scope of arbitrary state power, but one that also rejects the selfishness of extreme libertarianism and demands that the realm of individual freedom encompasses not just some but all of us. - Gordon Brown 25.10.07

Interesting article about Liberty by Mr Brown - which is the cornerstone of any argument relating to a government database.

Full Speech: Number10.gov.uk Speech on Liberty (25 Oct 07)

[LA]

There are many arguments for a Government database.

Firstly, a central database of all citizens' personal, medical and financial details would make for greater government efficiency by breaking down unnecessary barriers between departments. This allows governmental departments and institutions to work much more effectively with the information they have. Instead of searching through hundreds of files, they merely have to search for one. All this information is already presented on databases throughout hundreds of systems, you cannot call the intelligent sharing of information intrusive, all this database does is allow for easier processing.

Secondly, it will benefit members of the public by making it unnecessary for them to give the same information to different government departments. As their information is already stored on one database why go through the unpleasantries again and again when the information is already there and available.

It will also enable government departments to respond more quickly and effectively to people's needs. I made this point earlier, whereby they can use information they have collected to make decisions and act. This can save many lives; we need not have another Baby P suffer.

Lastly, it can help identify and check criminals and benefit fraudsters. As all the information is on one database it can reduce the amount of time spent on one particular case, which increases the value for money - less money is spent on the police force per case.

[JAMC]

JAMC's argument is based on the assumption the police or those with access will abuse it - An assumption is not a solid argument.

I am at a loss to explain your rationale. As a conservative, your natural instinct is to resist government intervention and intrusion where possible - yet you want to give the same government you wouldn't trust to calculate your tax liability correctly the keys to what would be the most invasive tool ever deployed in the UK?

A big part of establishing political freedoms in this country revolved around removing the state's ability to coerce the population (or the monarch depending how far back you want to go). Giving them a great big eStick is not the recipe for a freer, fairer society.

...and on the subject, I don't consider the likelihood of abuse an "assumption", more like a statistical inevitability.

records x fields x subjects x users x transactions per day x days in operation.

Most calculators would just give "E".

[JAMC]

Image if a Christian Socialist party came into power and resolved all of Britains problems, removed all the criminals, tracked down those in need of help.

wow, the database looks pretty good now...

One man's freedom, another man's tyranny.

I don't fancy being marginalised into a peripheral piece of turd on the fringes of society by a Thatcherite tory government.

I honestly believe the first thing a tory cabinet would do given access to this thing would be to hand the data over to the marketing depts of their various concerns. Medical records would be used for example to identify targets for Ken Clarke's BAT to identify potential new customers.

[LA]

I am at a loss to explain your rationale. As a conservative, your natural instinct is to resist government intervention and intrusion where possible - yet you want to give the same government you wouldn't trust to calculate your tax liability correctly the keys to what would be the most invasive tool ever deployed in the UK?

Okay, I would just like to make this completely clear.

I do not agree with the Labour Party in the creation of a National Database, because I believe it is a huge intrusion of ones private life. Not only this, but as many have pointed out, it can be used for many purposes which we; the general public, do not know of.

The only reason I am advocating for this database is because no one else is, and to have a good debate you require opposition. As such I have placed myself in the unpopular spot of advocating such an intrusion of public life. As such my next post will contain all the reasons why such a database should not be created.

A big part of establishing political freedoms in this country revolved around removing the state's ability to coerce the population (or the monarch depending how far back you want to go). Giving them a great big eStick is not the recipe for a freer, fairer society.

...and on the subject, I don't consider the likelihood of abuse an "assumption", more like a statistical inevitability.

records x fields x subjects x users x transactions per day x days in operation.

Most calculators would just give "E".

Read my above comment.

[LA]

There are many problems with the executives plan to create a national database within it containing all the information about oneself, as well as containing genetic samples.

Not only is this a massive intrusion into the private lives of citizens by the state, but why would a doctor or any medical practitioner require information about my taxes? Equally why would the Inland Revenue require access to my medical records?

The Executive advocates the creation of such a database in order to increase efficiency and reduce running costs that are spent on administration; the searching of records. Far from leading to greater efficiency, such a database would cause more human errors and confusion. Government databases contain huge quantities of information, a lot of it inaccurate or irrelevant.

Many of those advocating such a database would state that it would increase efficiency, like I have already stated, it would cause more problems. Proof of this can be found in the National Health Services computer system which has been a disaster with a huge cheque attached. Assembling a national database is a cause for incompetence, confusion and misuse of information.

It has been mentioned many times on this forum; 1984, a great publication written by George Orwell. Citizens of Britain have a fundamental right to enjoy a private, not only is this a right for us, but it has been established under EU legislation that all citizens should have a private life outside the grasp of the state. If the Executive were to assemble a national database of samples and information we would live out Orwell’s 1984!

[LA]

Something I forgot to mention.

The database will not be constructed by the Executive. It will be used by the Executive but run and constructed by a third party.

[Albion 69]

Please refrain from repeat posting , use the Edit option in previous post to add any additional information .

[cliffski]

There are many arguments for a Government database.
Firstly, a central database of all citizens' personal, medical and financial details would make for greater government efficiency

Really?

In theory maybe, but in practice, I doubt it. Show me a large scale government IT project that has resulted in efficiency gains, and has come in vaguely close to budget.
I used to work in IT. IT workers see government projects as a hilariously easy to squeeze gravy train that pays out and expects no results. This is unlikely to change in the short term.

[LA]

Really?

In theory maybe, but in practice, I doubt it. Show me a large scale government IT project that has resulted in efficiency gains, and has come in vaguely close to budget.
I used to work in IT. IT workers see government projects as a hilariously easy to squeeze gravy train that pays out and expects no results. This is unlikely to change in the short term.

I have explained in another post why it is flawed - It is only a few posts above this one for crying out loud.

I HATE IT WHEN PEOPLE DO NOT READ THE WHOLE THREAD!!!!!!!!