The surveillance state - "You're nicked, son. Give us your DNA"
Police target 'innocent' youths for arrest in bid to increase DNA
samples on database
By Daily Mail Reporter
Youths with no criminal record are being targeted for arrest so their
DNA can be logged on a database in the event they commit crimes.
A total of 386 under-18s had their DNA taken and stored by police last
year in one north London borough - more than one a day.
An experience officer working for the Metropolitan Police admitted the
DNA was being stored as part of a 'long-term crime prevention strategy'.
The officer said: 'We are often told that we have just one chance to get
that DNA sample and if we miss it then that might mean a rape or a
murder goes unsolved in the future.'
He added: 'Have we got targets for young people who have not been
arrested yet? The answer is yes.
'But we are not just waiting outside schools to pick them up, we are
acting on intelligence.
'If you know you have had your DNA taken and it is on a database then
you will think twice about committing burglary for a living. Already
this year some 169 under-18s have had their profiles uploaded.'
The officer, who asked not to be named, made the astonishing admission
after a Freedom of Information request reveal the startling figures in
Camden in London.
LibDem parliamentary candidate for Holborn and St Pancras, Jo Shaw,
obtained the figures and was shocked at the findings.
Ms Shaw said: 'Storing the DNA of innocent people as young as 10 is
unlikely to solve Camden's crime problems, but is a costly way of
stigmatising young people.
'If you're innocent, you shouldn't have your data kept for years. DNA
samples, which are taken by police after an arrest is made, are turned
into a number known as a profile and are kept on a national database
indefinitely.'
Camden's representative at the national Youth Parliament, Axel Landin,
said: 'Building a catalogue of people they think will be prominent
criminals in the future sounds like a renegade justice system.
'Someone who is not convicted of a crime is no more guilty in the eyes
of the law than someone who has never been investigated so their DNA
should be destroyed.
Chief Inspector Sean Wilson, of Camden Police, said: 'The DNA database
is a nationwide one.
'Legislation governing the recording and retention of DNA is fully
adhered to by Camden Police.'
New Government proposals state that youngsters who have only been
arrested once for minor offences and been found not guilty will have
their DNA profiles destroyed when they reach 18.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1190785/Police-target-innocent-
youths-arrest-bid-increase-DNA-samples-database.html
:
Shortcut to:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1190060/Former-MI6-chief-Sir-Rich
ard-Dearlove-warns-disturbing-surveillance-society.html
Big Brother HAS gone too far ... and that's an ex-spy chief talking
By Matthew Hickley
Last updated at 1:16 AM on 02nd June 2009
•Comments (13)
•Add to My Stories
Sir Richard Dearlove is concerned about the loss of liberties in 'Big
Brother' Britain
Warning: Sir Richard Dearlove is concerned about the loss of liberties
in 'Big Brother' Britain
The former head of MI6 has hit out at 'striking and disturbing'
invasions of privacy by the Big Brother state.
Sir Richard Dearlove, who led the Secret Intelligence Service from 1999
to 2004, claimed some were an 'abuse' of the law.
He attacked the 'loss of liberties' caused by expanding surveillance
powers and described some police operations as 'mind-boggling.'
The former spy chief joins a growing number of high-profile critics
warning that individual freedom and privacy are being seriously eroded
by the Government's disproportionate efforts to guard against terrorism.
Sir Richard was particularly critical of what he claimed were inadequate
laws to regulate some surveillance powers.
Commenting on the massive surge in police use of stop-and-search powers
in London, he highlighted the fact that Scotland Yard officers have
carried out more than 150,000 searches since 2007.
This compared with fewer than 300 in Manchester. Sir Richard said: 'That
is a mind-boggling statistic. That may well be an abuse of the law.
'I am a great believer in proportionality and as a citizen I worry about
the loss of my liberties.'
He questioned the legal constraints on the use of millions of CCTV
cameras across Britain, saying: 'We have constructed a society which has
great technical competence - and some of that competence isn't
particularly regulated.
More...
•Big Brother isn't working: How £500m of CCTV cameras does 'next to
nothing' to cut crime
•Metropolitan Police squad in G20 riots accused of 159 assaults in
past year
•TV presenter Jeremy Paxman brands Britons 'barbarians'... for
watching too much television
'I think the important thing in the UK is that there should be very
strict legislation and strict legislative oversight.'
Sir Richard, who spoke out during a question-and-answer appearance in
front of 800 people at the Hay on Wye Festival, was a career
intelligence officer who joined MI6 in 1966.
He was in charge of the agency at the time of the September 11 attacks,
and oversaw the response to the emerging threat from Al Qaeda.
stop and search
'Mind-boggling': The former head of MI6 said he was staggered by the
number of stop and searches made by the Metropolitan Police (file
picture)
When he left MI6 and became Master of Pembroke College, Cambridge,
officials said he would not be giving interviews or making public
appearances.
But in recent months he has spoken at a number of events.
Sir Richard's remarks echo concerns voiced recently by terrorism
watchdog Lord Carlile who criticised the number of stopandsearches and
said it risked gravely undermining relations with the Muslim community.
The House of Lords Constitution Committee recently called for the
state's Big Brother powers to be rolled back, while Information
Commissioner Richard Thomas has condemned the spread of surveillance,
particularly the UK's 4.5million CCTV cameras.
He said Home Office plans for a vast internet surveillance database were
'a step too far for the British way of life'.
Sir Richard said he believed the U.S. response to September 11 had been
disproportionate.
George Bush's administration detained and tortured hundreds of suspected
terrorists in foreign jails under the extraordinary rendition programme.
Sir Richard said: 'I'm a great believer in proportionality, and while
what happened on 9/11 was a dreadful and serious event, in no way did it
threaten the integrity of western civilisation.'
Asked about Britain's involvement in the CIA's rendition programme, Sir
Richard told the festival audience that MI6 would have sought
ministerial approval of any cases involving British citizens or
residents.
He said: 'The intelligence and security community act in sensitive
situations with political cover'.
Sir Richard admitted he had been aware of a number of rendition cases
while he was head of MI6, but claimed the Americans had not passed on
lists of names. He added: 'Yes, I think we were certainly aware. I mean
we were not aware of the detail, we were aware of some individual
cases.'
He said he had known of no cases involving British nationals, and
dismissed suggestions that the UK had run its own rendition programme to
move terror suspects abroad to be questioned and tortured.
The former spy chief said: 'No British minister would ever have agreed a
rendition action by us because I think the legal advice in the UK would
have been that under common law this was very questionable. U.S. lawyers
gave different advice.'
Sir Richard insisted Britain's position condemning torture remained
secure, adding: 'I do not know of any violations.
'We don't use torture and in instances where we know that, let's say, a
foreign government is not handling a case in line with our legal
procedures then we would express our disagreement and our disapproval.'
POLICY REVIEW: ANOTHER STEP TO INTERNET CONTROL
By John 'J' Trinckes
May 31, 2009
http://www.newswithviews.com:80/Trinckes/john101.htm
A recent report entitled Cyberspace Policy Review: Assuring a Trusted
and Resilient Information and Communications
Infrastructure<http://www.whitehouse.gov/assets/documents/Cyberspace_Poli
cy_Review_final.pdf>just came out of the White House.
This report was written by a team of government cybersecurity experts
that “inventoried relevant presidential policy directives, executive
orders, national strategies, and studies from government advisory boards
and private-sector entities.” The comprehensive review occurred over
60-days and intended to “assess U.S. policies and structures for
cybersecurity.” The team came up with ten
(10) recommendations (or near-term action plans) that are ultimately
supposed to mitigate cybersecurity-related risks. (Note: The report was
not conducted by an independent group or even provides the names or
affiliations of the individuals on the team of experts.)
Reading through the seventy-six (76) page report, I couldn't help myself
critiquing the quality of work that went into the report. First, the
run-on sentences were plenty and confusing. I found myself reading
sentences two and three times just to make out what the author(s) were
trying to explain. I consider myself to be an intelligent individual and
a published author as well. I guess the old saying that 'it is good
enough for government work, still applies.'
Second, the report states that “the engagement process included more
than 40 meetings and yielded more than 100 papers that provided specific
recommendations and goals.” If this were the case, then why are most
of the ten recommendations provided general in anture and rather vague
in substance?
It is hard for me to believe that a comprehensive report could be
completed in 60-days with as much information that would have to be
reviewed from 40 meetings and over 100 papers on the topic of
cybersecurity policy. This is especially true when the report defines
cybersecurity policy to include:
“strategy, policy, and standards regarding the security of and
operations in cyberspace, and encompasses the full range of threat
reduction, vulnerability reduction, deterrence, international
engagement, incident response, resiliency, and recovery policies and
activities, including computer network operations, information
assurance, law enforcement, diplomacy, military, and intelligence
missions as they relate to the security and stability of the global
information and communications infrastructure.”
Wow! That was a mouthful. Don’t worry, the scope of the report did not
include “other information and communications policy unrelated to
national security or securing the infrastructure.” I’m not really
sure what this means since the report defines cyberspace as pretty much
all encompassing:
“as the interdependent network of information technology
infrastructures, and includes the Internet, telecommunications networks,
computer systems, and embedded processors and controllers in critical
industries.”
The definition further goes on to say that “common usage of the term
also refers to the virtual environment of information and interactions
between people.” (Interesting, government control of the interaction
between people.)
Why was this review necessary?
“America’s failure to protect cyberspace is one of the most urgent
national security problems facing the new administration.” (Source:
Report by the Commission of Cybersecurity for the 44th Presidency,
December 2008). The report also states that:
“our digital infrastructure has already suffered intrusions that have
allowed criminals to steal hundreds of millions of dollars and
nation-states and other entities to steal intellectual property and
sensitive military information.”
Really, we had sensitive military information stolen? When? Where? Who?
Why was this not reported to us earlier? (I usually try to keep up on
these types of things, but never heard about this one. While other
sources were referenced in the report, this sentence had none.)
It is a known fact that “information and communications networks are
largely owned and operated by the private sector, both nationally and
internationally.” In addition, the private sector “designs, builds,
owns, and operates most of the digital infrastructures that support
government and private users alike.” The report indicates that there
are many ways that the Federal government can work with the private
sector. One way is by examining “existing public-private partnerships
to optimize their capacity to identify priorities and enable efficient
execution of concrete actions.” That’s nice, but it is nothing new.
I mean, let's keep doing the same things that we have been doing and
hopefully, we will get a different result. [How many times has that been
tried !...C]
What are some of the other ways that the Federal government can work
with the private sector? How about setting up an "incentive mechanism,"
per the report, to make more secure products and services available to
the public?
“Include adjustments to liability considerations (reduced liability in
exchange for improved security or increased liability for the
consequences of poor security), indemnification, tax incentives, and new
regulatory requirements and compliance mechanisms.”
OK, we need more regulations to make cyberspace safe, right? Of course,
“protecting cyberspace requires strong vision and leadership and will
require changes in policies, technologies, education, and perhaps laws.”
(You can be assured that there will be more 'laws' coming down the pipe
as I already hinted to in my last column Proposed Bill: Cybersecurity
Act of 2009 (SB773) – How the President of the United States Can
Control the Internet<http://www.newswithviews.com/Trinckes/john100.htm>
.)
No report from the government would again be complete without including
the part about how much it is going to cost us (The American People).
“The Federal government should initiate a national public awareness
and education campaign informed by previous successful campaigns.” (If
these campaigns were successful in the past, then why are we at the
point of urgency now in terms of our cybersecurity risks?) “The
government needs to increase investment in research that will help
address cybersecurity vulnerabilities while also meeting our economic
needs and national security requirements.” “Appoint a cybersecurity
policy official…” and “designate a privacy and civil liberties
official…” (Just curious what the salaries and benefits would be for
these two positions, heck, if it’s good, I may apply…. NOT!)
Let me digress for just a moment and explain how we’ve gotten to this
point. According to the report, “the impact of technology on national
and economic security needs has led the Federal government to adapt by
creating new laws and organizations.” (Not a shock here.) The report
indicates that even back to 1918, Congress authorized the President,
through a Joint Resolution, to assume control of any telegraph system in
the US and operate it as needed during World War I. [Boy, can't let
these guys do anything once - before they make it a permanent policy
!...C]
In 1934, The Communications Act formed the Federal Communications
Commission (FCC) to establish a broad regulatory framework for all
communications, by wire and radio. In 1957, the Soviet Union launched
Sputnik, the first man-made satellite. It was the peak of the cold war
and the US and the Soviet Union considered each other 'enemies'.
Americans were scared of this news and thought that since the Soviet
Union was able to launch a satellite into space, they could launch a
missile at us. In response to this and to give the US a technological
edge over other countries, President Dwight D. Eisenhower (not Al Gore)
created the Advanced Research Projects Agency (ARPA) in 1958. ARPA
enlisted help from Bolt, Beranek and Newman (BBN) to create the first
computer network connecting four computers running different operating
systems. They called the network ARPANET. A lot of the protocols used on
the Internet today were developed through ARPANET. As soon as larger
networks joined, the Internet was born.
(Source:computer.howstuffworks.com<http://computer.howstuffworks.com/inte
rnet-start.htm>) The Brooks Act of 1965 gave the National Bureau of
Standards (NBS), now the Department of Commerce’s National Institute
of Standards and Technology (NIST), responsibility for developing
standards and guidelines for federal computer systems. In 1984,
'Executive Order' 12472 re-chartered the National Communication System
(NCS) to include telecommunication assets owned or leased by the Federal
government. (In 2003, the Department of Homeland Security inherited the
NCS.) In 1994, the Foreign Relations Authorization Act authorized the
Department of State control over international communication and
information policy. Now, we have the Cybersecurity Act of 2009 sitting
in committee to give the President (or his designee) full control of the
Internet under the disguise of security. (Or mabye it is War since we
are still fighting two wars abroad and a war 'against terrorism', in all
forms and on all fronts, at home.)
Back to the topic at hand, the report recommends “leading from the
top” and appointing a cybersecurity policy official; however, “the
cybersecurity policy official should not have operational responsibility
or authority, nor the authority to make policy unilaterally.” What?
Let’s assign someone responsibility for cybersecurity, but not give
them any authority to implement any changes. Maybe we need to run our
government like successful private companies do. Most large companies
have a Chief Executive Officer (CEO) (i.e. the President) that has full
authority to run the company governed by the Board of Directors (i.e.
Congress) that reports to the business Owners (i.e. the People). They
put Chief Information Officers (CIO) or Chief Technology Officers (CTO)
in charge of technologies to align with business goals. They also have
Chief Security Officers (CSO) or Chief Information Security Officers
(CISO) that report to Security Committees (made up of high level
executives) or the Board of Directors directly to create an independence
element. Security is normally in direct conflict with operations, but
they both need to work together to create effective systems for
continued business prosperity.
I found this to be pretty interesting as the report goes on to say:
“A paucity of judicial opinions in several areas poses both
opportunities and risks that policy makers should appreciate—courts
can intervene to shape the application of law, particularly in areas
involving Constitutional rights. Policy decisions will necessarily be
shaped and bounded by the legal framework in which they are made, and
policy consideration may help identify gaps and challenges in current
laws and inform necessary developments in the law. That process may
prompt proposals for a new legislative framework to rationalize the
patchwork of overlapping laws that apply to information,
telecommunications, networks, and technologies, or the application of
new interpretations of existing laws in ways to meet technological
evolution and policy goals, consistent with U.S. Constitutional
principles. However, pursuing either course risks outcomes that may make
certain activities conducted by the Federal government to protect
information and communications infrastructure more difficult.”
Well we can’t have laws enacted to make the Federal government’s job
more difficult, can we? I guess that is one of the reasons why President
Obama nominated Judge Sonia Sotomayor. Judge Sotomayor is first nominee
with cyberlaw
record<http://pblog.bna.com/techlaw/2009/05/judge-sotomayor-is-first-nomi
nee-with-cyberlaw-record.html>. Coincidence? I think not.
The report does a fairly good job in pointing out some hesitations
thatprivate sector industries have in partnering with the federal
government. “Industry has also expressed reservations about disclosing
to the Federal government sensitive or proprietary business information,
such as vulnerabilities and data or network breaches.” “Industry may
still have concerns about reputational harm, liability, or regulatory
consequences of sharing information.” You think?
As a former police officer, one of the ploys we used was to have the
suspect tell on themselves. We would give the suspect some false sense
of hope that we were on their side, they should trust us, and things
would go easier if they would just tell us ‘the truth’. (More times
than not, the information the suspect provided to us created the case
against them in the first place. Until the suspect started talking, we
didn’t really have anything on them.) Do you think it would be any
different if a company admitted to not following certain laws? Or, if
they did, would the government grant some additional protection as the
report puts it: “The civil liberties and privacy community has
expressed concern that extending protections would only serve as a legal
shield against liability.” So if a company is not keeping to its
obligations in protecting their client's information, but as long as
they tell the government about it and followed their standards in 'good
faith' (although these standards may have been lacking or not followed
during a specific time frame that led to the security breach), they will
be protected from lawsuits? [Don't hold your breath on it !..C]
Here is another statement in the report that concerned me:
“Responsibility for a Federal cyber incident response is dispersed
across many Federal departments and agencies because of the existing
legal, but artificial, distinctions between national security and other
Federal networks.”
If my interpretation is correct, the report writers are pretty much
saying that there is NO distinction between national security and 'other
Federal networks', thus any Federal department or agency would be
considered under the umbrella of a national security incident even if
the department or agency doesn’t deal in national security related
activity. Interesting, no?
I really like this one, “the government needs a reliable, consistent
mechanism for bringing all appropriate information together to form a
common operating picture.” Computer systems and networks have been
around for about 50 years now and although technology has advanced, the
government still hasn't gotten a good operating picture of their
systems? This brings to my mind Cybernet in The Terminator movies.
(I’m not saying we will have metal robots come to life to kill all
humans, but if you recall the basis of the Cybernet program, it was to
effectively monitor/control all government systems under one system.
Unfortunately, Cybernet took over all these systems. It also contained
some ‘artificial’ intelligence components. Wait, haven’t I heard
this word 'artificial' before somewhere else?)
The report indicates that “we cannot improve cybersecurity without
improving authentication, and identity management is not just about
authenticating people.” It isn't?
“The Nation should implement, for high-value activities (e.g., the
Smart Grid), an opt-in array of interoperable identity management
systems to build trust for online transactions and to 'enhance
privacy'.” [They are joking right ? ..C]
I bolded the ‘opt-in’ since I always take this as meaning optional.
We all now how easy optional becomes mandatory through varied mechanisms
of control. We are all to familiar with the Federal government
'enhancing privacy' matters. What privacy means to me is not what
privacy means to the government.
“The Federal government also should consider extending the
availability of Federal identity management systems to operators of
critical infrastructure and to private-sector emergency response and
repair service providers for use during national emergencies.”
Again with the 'national emergencies' since we all know how well the
Federal government has handled these in the past.[Choke]. As far as
I’m aware, the current administration still hasn’t got anyone in
control of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
There are fourteen (14) additional mid-term action plans, but again,
they are all pretty general and vague with no direct guidance on how or
what impact these recommendations would ultimately have in the real
world or on cybersecurity.
As a point of reference, I highlighted the words ‘global’ and
‘international’ above. I counted at least 35 times that ‘global’
was used throughout this report and at least 76 times that
‘international’ was used. Coincidence? I think not. (Can anyone say
New World Order?)
In conclusion, I’m a huge proponent of Information Security and making
the Internet (i.e. cyberspace or whatever you want to call it this week)
more secure. It is very important to me. I live it, I breath it, and I
know some of the risks and threats are real; however, I don’t believe
this report to provide a clear, concise solution to the problems. It
appears more to me to be some sort of mission statement or one group’s
agenda on how to take control of the Internet (i.e. cyberspace) under
the disguise of assuring a trusted and resilient information and
communication infrastructure. (I don't know about you, but my Internet
(i.e. cyberspace) connection has been on and running pretty well over
the last few years. I mean, there are those moments that it doesn't work
just the way it should, but these occassions are rare and far in
between.) Isn't this the reason why we need more regulations and
control, from the government to ensure a 100% uptime, right?
I do have to agree with at least one statement from the report: “The
Federal government is not organized to address this growing problem
[cybersecurity] effectively now or in the future.”
"This is just one of those reasons why I hate stupid people."
You can change or cancel this mailing using :
http://www.no2id.net/mailman/options/no2id-supporters
You can view this newsletter on-line in colour at:
http://www.no2id.net/news/newsletters/newsletter.php?issue=124
++ NO2ID Supporters' Newsletter No. 124 - 4th June 2009 ++
*Contacting us:* Call or email the office - 020-7793-4005 or
(office@no2id.net). Please do not reply to this email. (The from address
is not a working email address)
+ POLITICS MAY BE PARALYSED - BUT *POLICY* GOES ON +
In some newspaper reports of the resignation of Jacqui Smith it has been
suggested that it makes a difference to the ID scheme of which she was a
"strong supporter". NO2ID doubts that. Ms Smith is the fourth Home
Secretary and one of a dozen Home Office ministers we have dealt with,
all of whom have pursued the same policy using (allowing for a few
changes in spin and timetabling) virtually the same words. The ID scheme
is a government policy. It was for decades before that a Home Office
ambition. Peter Lilley MP, who was a cabinet minister under both Mrs
Thatcher and Mr Major, recalls it being offered "as the remedy for all
our ills from crime to shortage of kidney donors".
Now there are two highly paid groups of civil servants in Whitehall, the
executives of the Identity and Passport Service, and the
Transformational Government team in the Cabinet Office, whose work is
built around the implementation and expansion of what they are now
promoting as the "National Identity Service". They are the ones writing
the cue cards for ministers making speeches on the scheme. It is not
going away simply because a new minister is not an enthusiast. The same
is true of all the other database-state projects being nurtured by
various departments.
What *will* make a difference is a clear change in government policy.
Opposition parties are promising that, and a new Labour leader could
choose to change direction where Gordon Brown failed. Real policy change
requires continuing political pressure from the public. NO2ID will be
keeping up that pressure.
Please help us by ensuring everyone you know is aware that the threat
has not gone away just because the newspapers have temporarily forgotten
it.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
What just happened?
+ German privacy video looks at retention of communications data
+
German film maker Alexander Lehmann has released a video on YouTube
entitled 'You are a terrorist' which highlights the controversial issue
of communications data retention across Europe. The video states: "there
are more than 82 million terrorists hiding in Germany. You are one of
them! For the last 6 months all of your activities have been monitored,
for instance: who you call and when, when you use your mobile and where,
when and where you access the internet and what sites you are visiting".
In the UK the retention of communications data such as emails was snuck
through as secondary legislation (The Data Retention (EC Directive)
Regulations 2009) in April.
Watch the video at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=570WQqye8_Q
+ ID Cards secondary legislation consultation response +
The Home Office has published a response to its consultation on the
Identity Cards Act secondary legislation (the detailed regulations which
will implement the act). The document states: "This was the latest step
in a number of public consultations relating to identity cards where
there has been consultation on different aspects of the national
identity scheme -- now being referred to as the National Identity
Service". There were 169 responses to the consultation "including 127
from members of the public and 42 from various organisations". The
response overplays what information will go on the actual card, stating:
"Respondents were generally content with the information that was
proposed to be included on the card with some acceptance of the choice
of using the familiar passport standards". What is doesn't dicuss is the
large amount of information that will be stored in the database behind
the cards.
See
http://www.ips.gov.uk/identity/downloads/DocC_%20ID_act_secondary_legisla
tion_response.pdf
+ Southampton Students oppose ID scheme +
An anti-ID card motion has been passed by Southampton University
Students' Union Council and was approved by 87% of representatives. The
resolution means the Students' Union opposes in principle the National
Identity Scheme and will not co-operate with it unless required to do so
by law. It also mandates that the Union President (who represents
approximately 25,000 students) should write to the Home Secretary
declaring their opposition. The motion points out: "That the National
Identity Scheme will make students liable to pay fines of between £1,000
and £2,500 if they do not adhere to the Scheme's conditions. (For
example, if they do not inform the Government when they move house.)"
+ Lords warn of trouble ahead over DNA database plans +
On Wednesday (3rd June) the House of Lords had a 2nd Reading debate for
the Policing and Crime Bill during which the government's plans to
retain the DNA of innocent people was discussed. The government has put
an enabling power in the bill to make regulations for the retention and
destruction of DNA. This would mean that new guidelines would be passed
without proper parliamentary debate. Baroness Harris of Richmond said:
"These matters should not be dealt with by secondary legislation,
especially as the DNA profiles of people not convicted of any offence
could be held for up to 12 years. It is imperative that Parliament
scrutinises this scheme and ensures that, if amendments need to be made,
they will be. That is impossible under this proposal, which should be
removed from the Bill".
Read a transcript of the debate at
http://www.theyworkforyou.com/lords/?id=2009-06-03a.219.11
------------------------------------------------------------------------
What's next?
**
*+ 18th June - NO2ID London Activists Meeting +*
Thursday, 18th June from 7pm at 29A Chamberlain House, Phoenix Road,
London NW1 1EU (Entrance on Ossulston Street). NO2ID is launching a
London-wide activist group to help raise the profile of NO2ID at London
events and recruit members to the campaign beyond our usual circles.
These events will take the form of quarterly meetings, training sessions
and an emailing list. Our first gathering will be a showing of the film
'Taking Liberties' followed by a talk and a call to action from Phil
Booth, NO2ID's National Coordinator and DATES FOR ACTION. Anyone and
everyone is welcome to come along.
The group will be run through the id-action mailing list - join the list
to be kept up to date on the London NO2ID activist group and
opportunities to get involved:
http://www.no2id.net/mailman/listinfo/id-action
**
*+ Volunteers needed for Mark Thomas gigs +*
Mark Thomas has invited NO2ID to help at some of his shows this year.
NO2ID needs volunteers to help out as Mark tours around the country - we
still need volunteers for the following gigs: Wellingborough 9th June,
Barnstable 12th June, Bridport 18th June, Stockton on Tees 23rd June,
Lincoln 24th June, Bath 25th June - email Matty on
local.groups@no2id.net if you can help.
For details of gigs see http://www.markthomasinfo.com/section_gigs/
*+ Communications Data consultation +*
The Home Office has launched a consultation on proposals for the
so-called Intercept Modernisation Programme whereby the government wants
internet service providers and telecommunications companies data to
store details of all UK emails, phone calls and web activity so that
public authorities can get hold of that information when they want it.
The consultation ends on 20 July 2009.
Full details and how to respond at
http://www.tellthemwhatyouthink.org/consultation/con-2217-protecting-publ
ic-changing-environment
*+ DNA Database consultation +*
The government has launched a consultation 'Keeping the right people on
the DNA database'. The consultation closes on 7th August - responses can
be emailed to (DNAconsultation@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk). For details of
the consultation and links to the relevant consultation documents see
http://www.tellthemwhatyouthink.org/consultation/con-2255-keeping-right-p
eople-dna-database
+ LOCAL GROUPS NEWS +
To see if there's a group in your area check our list at
http://www.no2id.net/localGroups/
Or, if you're interested in starting a group yourself, please contact
Matty on local.groups@no2id.net to discuss what's involved and what we
have in place to support coordinators and their groups.
_*+ Alexandra Palace +*_
*+ 17th June - Alexandra Palace NO2ID 1st Meeting +*
Wednesday, 17 June at 8.15pm at The Gate pub on Station Road, N22 7SS.
Directions: The Gate is opposite Alexandra Palace station (overground
line) and a short walk from Wood Green tube station (Picadillly Line).
The W3 stops outside.(map
http://www.streetmap.co.uk/newmap.srf?x=530331&y=190498&z=0&ar=Y).
Everyone is welcome, newcomer or not, curious or committed. Please bring
a friend. For more information contact alexandra.palace@no2id.net
If you are interested in the work of the Alexandra Palace group or are
planning on attending the meeting please join the mailng list on:
http://lists.no2id.net/mailman/listinfo/no2id.alexandra-palace
_*+ Birmingham +*_
*+ 30th June - Birmingham NO2ID Meeting (last Tuesday of month) +*
Tuesday, 30th June 7.30pm in the boardroom in Bennett's Bar, Bennett's
Hill, B2 5RS. NO2ID Birmingham holds regular monthly meetings on the
last Tuesday of the month. This month's meeting will be looking into the
European elections.
_*+ Cambridge +*_
On 1st June Cambridge NO2ID collaborated with the local branches of
Oxfam and Amnesty International to organise a Euro-election husting. The
five candidates on the panel (from the Liberal Democrat, UK
Independence, Labour, Green and Conservative parties) answered questions
on a broad range of issues from global warming to Palestine. Although ID
cards are not being forced upon us via the EU, another aspect of the
"Database State" is - former Home Secretary Charles Clarke helped push
the European Data Retention Directive through the EU Parliament as a way
of extending data retention powers in the UK without having them debated
at Westminster. This directive forces all telephone and internet
companies to store details of every email, phone call and text message
sent or received for a full year. Cambridge NO2ID submitted a question
on this, and in response all the parties except Labour expressed a
desire to roll back the Database State. Even Labour's representative,
the party's lead candidate in the Eastern region, said that he was
willing to talk to NO2ID in future. If he's elected, we plan to take him
up on this offer
*+ 6th June - NO2ID Stall at Cambridge Strawberry Fair +*
Volunteers needed to man the stall at Cambridge Strawberry Fair for 2
hour shifts from 10am until 6pm: please contact cambridge@no2id.net, or
text/call Andrew Watson on 07710 469624. We signed up 500 supporters
last year - we'd like to improve on that number this year. (Strawberry
Fair info: http://www.strawberry-fair.org.uk)
*+ 20th June - Cambridge NO2ID Street Stall +*
Saturday, 20th June in the usual spot outside Cambridge Guildhall
(http://www.aardvarkmap.net/mape/T5LZATLS) from 10 am. Please contact
Andrew on 07710 469624 if you'd like to help.
_*+ Camden and Islington +*_
**
Camden & Islington NO2ID meet on the 1st Tuesday of each month at 8pm at
The The Kings Head, 59 Essex Road, Islington, N1 2SF. For more info
email camden@no2id.net or join the mailing list at:
(http://www.no2id.net/mailman/listinfo/no2id.camden).
_**__*+ Chelmsford and Mid Essex +*_
*+ 27th June - Chelmsford and Mid Essex NO2ID Street Stall +*
Saturday, 27th June in the morning in central Chelmsford - we are
organising an important stall. Offers of help are appreciated from
anyone in Essex. For more information, please contact Felicity direct on
londaf1@aol.com
_*+ Cheltenham +*_
*+ 6th June - Cheltenham NO2ID leafletting (Every other Saturday) +*
Saturday, 6th June from 11am 'til 1pm, meet by the Hare on the Prom.
*+ 25th June - Cheltenham NO2ID Meeting (last Thursday of each month) +*
Thursday, 25th June 7.30pm at The Swan, 37 High Street, Cheltenham, GL50
1DX. All welcome.
If you can make either or both regular slots, it'd be good to see you.
If you cannot but would like to be involved in other ways, please either
email cheltenham@no2id.net or phone 07802 151464
_*+ Daventry +*_
*+ 6th June - Daventry NO2ID Street Stall +*
Saturday, 6th June in Daventry High Street. For more details contact
daventry@no2id.net
*+ 10th June - Daventry NO2ID Meeting (2nd Weds of month) +*
Wednesday, 10th June 8pm at the Dun Cow, Brook St, Daventry
_**_
_*+ Dorking +*_
We get together every first Tuesday of the month at the Lincoln Arms,
near Dorking mainline station at 7.30pm. On the agenda this month and
next will be new street stalls and a discussion on the public meeting in
Ewell 9th September. On the panel will be Justice Minister Michael
Wills, Conservative Shadow Home Secretary Chris Grayling, Phil Booth
plus a LibDem and possible one other. Don't miss it.
_*+ Dover +*_
*+ 13th June - Dover NO2ID Street Stall, Folkestone +*
Saturday, 13th June from 10am (weather permitting) probably for around 3
hours (give or take one). Location: Sandgate Road pedestrian precinct,
by the junction with Westcliff Gardens. In the event that weather does
not permit (rain/high winds) we would attempt to go to the following
Saturday -- 20th June. We have some little enhancements to the stall.
All help appreciated. Contact Ian Taylor on (dover@no2id.net). We'd
really appreciate some help at 10am as car needs unloading before being
taken somewhere legal to park.
_*+ Edinburgh +
*_****
*+ 30th June - NO2ID Edinburgh Meeting +*
Tuesday 30th June at 7.00pm at the Quaker Meeting House, 7 Victoria
Terrace, Edinburgh EH1 2JL. Members evening: short talks on why many IT
professionals are against ID cards, and a brief history of ID cards.
Also members' demonstration of robotic street theatre and the premiere
of a new ID campaign film. More details at
(http://www.no2id-scotland.net/edinburgh/future_meetings.html). All
welcome.
*
Saturdays 1pm - 3pm - NO2ID Edinburgh street stall*
Every week, weather permitting, you will find our campaigning stall at
the east end of Princes Street, opposite the Balmoral Hotel. Do drop by
for a chat. New volunteers - please contact John (edinburgh@no2id.net),
and for more group information see
http://www.no2id-scotland.net/edinburgh/
_*+ Epsom +*_
If you want to get in touch, why not come along to the Dorking Group get
togethers every first Tuesday of the month at the Lincoln Arms, near
Dorking mainline station at 7.30pm. On the agenda this month will be new
street stalls and a discussion on the public meeting in Ewell 9th
September. On the panel will be Justice Minister Michael Wills,
Conservative Shadow Home Secretary Chris Grayling, Phil Booth plus a
LibDem and possible one other. Don't miss it.
If anyone wants to get involved in the Epsom area, please email or phone
NO2ID South East Regional Coordinator Geoff Cox on south.east@no2id.net
or call 01306 631377.
**
_*+ Glasgow +*_
****Glasgow NO2ID meet on the 1st Tuesday of each month at 8pm in Mono.
All welcome. Please contact Geraint for further details:
glasgow@no2id.net
_*+ Great Missenden +*_
*+ 6th June - Great Missenden NO2ID Street Stall +*
Saturday, 6th June from 10.00 am until 3.00 pm at Chesham market. Please
encourage anyone you know to come along. We are hoping to get some local
councillors to come and pledge their support.
_*+ Hammersmith & Fulham +
*_
Please keep diaries free for a talk exposing 'The Surveillance Society'
evening of Wednesday, 22nd July. More info shortly.
*+ 13th June - Hammersmith & Fulham NO2ID Street Stall +*
Saturday, 13th June, 11.00-12.00 (min.). Stall with petitions, leaflets
and artwork. 5 mins from Chiswick Park tube. Look for us near the
Starbuck's coffee shop, 376 Chiswick High Rd, W4 5TF - map ref:
(http://www.streetmap.co.uk/map.srf?x=520512&y=178524&z=0&sv=w4+5tf&st=2&
pc=w4+5t
f&mapp=map.srf&searchp=ids.srf). Help from any supporters in West London
welcomed. More information from Brian, 07976-414913.
_*+ Hebden Bridge +*_
***+ 25th June - Hebden Bridge NO2ID Meeting +*
Thursday 25th June 7.30pm at the Fox and Goose. Please email
hebden.bridge@no2id.net for further information.
_*+ Ipswich +*_
*Calling Ipswich supporters*
On 30th May Cambridge and Norwich NO2ID groups joined forces to run a
very successful street stall in Ipswich town centre, garnering over 130
new NO2ID supporters. We'd like to build on this success to re-establish
an Ipswich local group. If you live near Ipswich and would be interested
in participating in a local group there, please contact Andrew Watson
(andrew.watson@no2id.net) or Matty Mitford (local.groups@no2id.net).
_*+ Kensington and Chelsea +*_
Kensington and Chelsea no2id will hold a number of stalls this summer:-
*+ 13th June - Kensington & Chelsea NO2ID Street Stall, The British
Constitution Group Conference +*
Saturday 13th June at The British Constitution Group Conference at
Friends House, 173-177 Euston Road, London NW1 2BJ
*+ 20th June - Kensington & Chelsea NO2ID Street Stall, Daily Worker
Conference +*
Saturday, 20th June 09:30-16:30 at TUC Conference Hall, Congress House,
23-28 Great Russell Street, London WC1B 3LS
*+ 21st June - Kensington & Chelsea NO2ID Street Stall, Earl's Court
Street Fair +*
Sunday, 21st June Earls Court Street Fair
(Unfortunately our most recent Sunday in Portobello Stall was not very
successful. We are going to try a Friday in July.)
All offers of help will be gratefully received for Earl's Ct and
Portobello and you can get our mugs without having to the pay fiendish
P&P.
_*+ Kingston-Upon-Thames +*_
If you are interested in the work of the Kingston group please join the
Kingston-Upon-Thames mailing list here:
http://lists.no2id.net/mailman/listinfo/no2id.kingston-upon-thames
_*+ Leicester +*_
Update on the Mark Thomas gig: we handed out several dozen leaflets and
collected several signatures for our petition so thanks to Jackie and
Josh for their help.
_*+ Manchester +*_
*+ 13th June - Manchester NO2ID Street Stall +*
13th June, 2-4pm in St. Ann's Square in Manchester City Centre (down
near the big Marks and Spencer), to raise awareness among the public and
engage people in discussion about the National Identity Register. We'll
be collecting signatures for the NO2ID petition to keep people in touch
with the campaign. We'll meet in the square itself at 2pm to set up
shop; feel free to join us to lend a hand or just chat. You don't need
any experience or equipment, just a bit of time to spare and a friendly
smile!
*+ 17th June - Manchester NO2ID Monthly Meeting +*
Wednesday, 17th June 2009 7pm-9pm in the Town Hall Tavern, Tib Lane,
Manchester. Sadly, this venue is not wheelchair-accessible; please
contact us on manchester@no2id.net if you have accessibility needs. We
are always looking for volunteers to take and type up minutes from our
meetings; it's an easy way to help the campaign! The Town Hall Tavern
serves reasonably-priced, good quality food until 9pm so you don't need
to pop home for tea - you can even order your meal brought up to the
function room.
http://manchester.no2id.net/content/monthly-meeting-june-2009
_*+ Newport +
*_
Newport NO2ID relaunched with a new Coordinator just a month ago and
enquiries have been coming in steadily from across South Wales - from
west of Cardiff up to Abergavenny and of course Newport itself (Wales
has its own ideas about boundaries!). So far we've signed up 15 members,
including 2 city council members. Several members have already swung
into action as researchers and we've had some friendly interest in
response to our initial approach to Welsh Assembly members - one of whom
has asked to meet the coordinator of our group. We will be doing a small
practice stall in the centre of Newport itself by the end of June,
followed by one of the main community festivals of this region in July.
Grenya our big fluffy red dragon will be sitting on our stall to
encourage interest and comment.
*+ 15th June - Newport NO2ID 1st Meeting +*
Monday, 15th June, 7pm at House Morgain, Chelston Place, Newport NP20
5LX. Please do put this in your diary and come to meet me/ us. Coffee/
tea/ wine/ beer as you will. You can email Shan Morgain on
newport@no2id.net or join the mailing list at
(http://lists.no2id.net/mailman/listinfo/no2id.newport).We have a packed
agenda. First there is the all important stall planning, including a
training event for members unused to doing stalls but interested in
doing so. We will also be making plans for a campaign of letter writing
to suitable media targets and we'll also be pooling a list of sites to
place notices about NO2ID.
*
*_*+ Norwich +*_
*****+ 13th June - Norwich NO2ID Street Stall +*
Saturday, 13th June 1pm-3pm at The Haymarket, Gentleman's Walk - so
please come along to express your discontent at this expensive and
intrusive scheme. It should hopefully be sunny and cheerful, but best
bring a brolly and a smile in case! The database state won't just go
away if you sit at home.
*+ 16th June - Norwich NO2ID Group Meeting +*
Tuesday, 16th June 7.30pm-9pm at The Workshop (opposite The Black Horse)
on Earlham Road. It's a friendly atmosphere so drop in and join us to
discuss how we can build support for the campaign and spread the word
further.
*+ 22nd June - Mark Thomas - It's The Stupid Economy Stall +*
Monday 22nd June sees Mark Thomas bringing his political comedy to
Norwich. He has helpfully agreed to let us put a stand up to inform
people about the cause, starting 7pm-8pm and then after the show
10pm-11pm approx. For more information contact norwich@no2id.net
If you are interested in the work of the Norwich group, please join
their mailing list on:
http://www.no2id.net/mailman/listinfo/no2id.norwich
_*+ Oxford +*_
*+ 25th June - Oxford NO2ID Public Meeting +*
Thursday, 25th June 8pm in the Sutro Room at Trinity College. This will
feature a series of speakers discussing identity and privacy in the
modern age. All welcome. Guests will include: * Robert Buckland (Tory
candidate, Swindon South), * Steve Goddard (Lib Dem candidate, Oxford
East), * Peter Hitchens (Columnist, Mail on Sunday), * Peter Tatchell
(Human Rights Campaigner, Green candidate, Oxford East), * Glyn Wintle
(Open Rights Group)
See the website for more: http://no2id-oxford.org.uk/
_**__*+ Sheffield +*_
*+ 6th June - Sheffield NO2ID at Peace in the Park, Ponderosa +*
Saturday, 6th June at the Ponderosa, Netherthorpe (see
http://web.peaceinthepark.org.uk/)
** *+ 10th June - Sheffield NO2ID Meeting +*
Wednesday, 10th June at 7.30pm at The Harlequin Pub, 108 Nursery St,
Sheffield, S3 8GG (http://maps.google.co.uk/maps?q=s3+8gg).
_*+ Shrewsbury +*_
*+ 27th June - Shrewsbury NO2ID lunch club and street stall +*
Saturday, 27th June - Come for lunch at Rococo in Butcher Row at 12.30pm
(look for NO2ID fliers on the table), and then join us on the street
stall in Pride Hill. If you let Rob Findlay know that you're coming
(shrewsbury@no2id.net or 07973 848910) then we can grab enough table
space for everybody.
_*+ Southampton +*_
Southampton NO2ID holds a regular monthly meeting and plotting session
on the first Wednesday of the month at 8:00pm in the Dolphin Pub next to
St Denys railway station
*Southampton NO2ID Street Stalls*
We are keen to move the stall to different locations in and around
Southampton. If you would like to have a stall near you, then please get
in touch with the group via southampton.no2id@gmail.com.
_*+ York +*_
*+ 6th June - York NO2ID Street Stall +*
Saturday, 6th June 10.30 am in Parliament Street
------------------------------------------------------------------------
"ID" in the news
*+ Airport ID cards only for the newbies - The Register 4/6/09 +*
The trial of ID cards for airside workers at City of London and
Manchester airports will be a slightly slower process than we imagined.
The cards will only be mandatory for new staff, not for all pilots and
staff working at the airports. The Home Office reckon this was always
the case and we remembered wrongly - we bow to their semantics and long
memories.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/06/04/id_card_limits/
*+ BMA leader calls for NPfIT to be scrapped - e-Health Insider 3/6/09
+*
One of the leaders of the British Medical Association has described the
NHS IT programme as "the worst case of planning blight across the NHS"
and called for it to be ended.
http://www.e-health-insider.com/news/4900/bma_leader_calls_for_npfit_to_b
e_scrapped
*+ ID database snooped for celebrities' secrets - The Inquirer 3/6/09 +*
The two Glasgow staff were caught snooping on people in the Department
for Work and Pensions (DWP) Customer Information Systems (CIS) database,
which includes among its 85 million records the personal details about
everyone in the UK, and which the Identity and Passport Service plans to
use as the foundation of the national ID scheme.
http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/1184506/id-database-snooped-cele
brities-secrets
*+ Jacqui Smith departure causes speculation over ID cards - Computing
3/6/09 +*
Westminster speculation has raised a new question mark over the future
of the government's flagship identity card scheme, following news of the
forthcoming departure of home secretary Jacqui Smith.
http://www.computing.co.uk/computing/news/2243417/jacqui-smith-departure-
brings
*+ U-turn on airport ID cards - Public Servant Daily 2/6/09 +*
As part of the initial roll-out of ID cards, the government announced
plans - called the critical worker identity card (CWIC) scheme - for all
those in sensitive roles at airports to be issued with an identity card.
But when Home Secretary Jacqui Smith officially launched an
early-adopter scheme for the citizens of Manchester in May, a much
smaller announcement was made changing the rules of the CWIC scheme.
http://www.publicservice.co.uk/news_story.asp?id=9644
*+ UK at Number 5 in global list of most repressive regimes - Telecom TV
2/6/09 +*
A new report, from the Internet security company, Cryptohippie, puts the
UK at Number Five in the list of the world's most repressive regimes in
terms of the electronic surveillance of its citizens.
http://www.telecomtv.com/comspace_newsDetail.aspx?n=45031&id=e9381817-059
3-417a-8639-c4c53e2a2a10
*+ Camera grid to log number plates - BBC News Online 22/5/09 +*
A national network of cameras and computers automatically logging car
number plates will be in place within months, the BBC has learned.
Thousands of Automatic Number Plate Recognition cameras are already
operating on Britain's roads.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/whos_watching_you/8064333.stm
Posts
