dangie
On Moderation
Bring it on. I'll just put it in my wallet next to my library card, bus pass & British Cycling membership card. They all have my name on them, plus other stuff I probably don't know about. Really don't see the problem.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Should we have a universal ID card?
- Thread starter Vexed
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
brad465
Veteran Member
True, but I was replying to someone discussing popularity levels, so it made sense to provide polling data on the matter.
I really don't understand how this comment was posted?
DerekC
Established Member
There are some pretty strange and illogical ideas in this thread. I think this is going to happen one day, and since this government is relatively benign (compared with future ones that you might imagine) it's probably better done now when the right limitations are likely to be built into the system. If it combines my NHS ID, my National Insurance number, my Tax ID and my driving licence ID that seems like a plus - why do we need four separate ones for different arms of government? And if it allows better control of who is in this country and things like age restrictions on purchasing alcohol, that's fine with me too.
Oh, and an illogical thought to end with - if the Daily Mail is campaigning against it, it must be a good idea!
Oh, and an illogical thought to end with - if the Daily Mail is campaigning against it, it must be a good idea!
DoubleLemon
Member
For those who are may wonder why the NI number is not enough to stop people from working illigally:
Not everyone has an NI number and NI numbers are not proof of ID or right to work in the UK - they can be shared and are done by illegal immigrants - its just a number with a hash to try and stop people getting them mixed up when entering into online systems.
They can't check your immigration status or visa, nor are they issued to people until they turn 16. You can change your NI number as well in very limited circumstances .
there is no requirement to supply an NI number when starting work - its always been that you created a temp ni number in the payroll T
OB> T20081978 until HMRC issue one. You don't do this now, its left blank. HMRC will use other data to try and trace the NI number via NVR (National Insurance Verification Request) but it needs the number to be issued first.
There are a number of issues with an NVR
HMRC use forename, surname gender and DOB to identify you when you are set up on PAYE- It then checks that against the NI number - if it thinks the information submitted is not correct it may be sending another NI number to your employer or applying payments to the wrong account. HMRC may also think one has 2 jobs at some point.
Its important to make sure your employer has the NI number correct on the payroll. They may receive a response from HMRC asking them to update it (and the payroll may do it automatically)
To be clear this is not the same as doing the first payroll without the NI number (that is allowed as some people would not have had one issued if they only recently have right to work in the uk). In that instance the system does a trace using:
Sometimes it gets things mixed up as hmrc wont know who they are as they could be another person with a similar name. For example their child and they have not had the NI number for whatever reason.
I know for a fact there are 4 other people with the same forename and surname - they are not related, I don't know them. but they exist. That's where the check against the DOB comes in.
We don't have an identity card with a unique ID so its always going to have issues like this. A NI number is not an identifier (I believe there is a separate key used by gov.uk) as NI numbers cant be required for government services as you may not have one (age or recently come to the UK). We refused to solve this by rejecting a national identity card which, when entered into gov.uk systems should stop all of this mess when RTI was implemented for payroll.
Dont get me started on NI Numbers and NEST pensions. That was as fun conversation with them. To be fair they were really good at making changes once we pointed some things out.
Not everyone has an NI number and NI numbers are not proof of ID or right to work in the UK - they can be shared and are done by illegal immigrants - its just a number with a hash to try and stop people getting them mixed up when entering into online systems.
They can't check your immigration status or visa, nor are they issued to people until they turn 16. You can change your NI number as well in very limited circumstances .
There are also limits to who can ask for your NI number (by law, unlike the SSN in the US)
Both quotes from https://www.gov.uk/browse/tax/national-insurance
there is no requirement to supply an NI number when starting work - its always been that you created a temp ni number in the payroll T
OB> T20081978 until HMRC issue one. You don't do this now, its left blank. HMRC will use other data to try and trace the NI number via NVR (National Insurance Verification Request) but it needs the number to be issued first.There are a number of issues with an NVR
HMRC use forename, surname gender and DOB to identify you when you are set up on PAYE- It then checks that against the NI number - if it thinks the information submitted is not correct it may be sending another NI number to your employer or applying payments to the wrong account. HMRC may also think one has 2 jobs at some point.
Its important to make sure your employer has the NI number correct on the payroll. They may receive a response from HMRC asking them to update it (and the payroll may do it automatically)
To be clear this is not the same as doing the first payroll without the NI number (that is allowed as some people would not have had one issued if they only recently have right to work in the uk). In that instance the system does a trace using:
- Surname or family name
- Forename or given name
- Initials
- Second forename
- Date of birth
- Current gender
- Address
Sometimes it gets things mixed up as hmrc wont know who they are as they could be another person with a similar name. For example their child and they have not had the NI number for whatever reason.
I know for a fact there are 4 other people with the same forename and surname - they are not related, I don't know them. but they exist. That's where the check against the DOB comes in.
We don't have an identity card with a unique ID so its always going to have issues like this. A NI number is not an identifier (I believe there is a separate key used by gov.uk) as NI numbers cant be required for government services as you may not have one (age or recently come to the UK). We refused to solve this by rejecting a national identity card which, when entered into gov.uk systems should stop all of this mess when RTI was implemented for payroll.
Dont get me started on NI Numbers and NEST pensions. That was as fun conversation with them. To be fair they were really good at making changes once we pointed some things out.
Last edited:
Physical cards are almost certainly going to be an option. Remember how this forum repeatedly has discussions on the downsides of digital railcards or e-tickets when not printed - this would be far more significant.
The card itself doesn't cost that much to issue. Employers do it all the time. DVLA can issue you a driving licence for a tenner and a few pounds of that is postage.
The Labour mark 1 ID card had a chip and an MRZ. It was basically just the passport information page in credit card form. As such you could read it on just about any device, just as you can read your passport on your phone if you wish to see what's on the chip. This also made it valid for EU travel back when we could enjoy such things.
Who is to say you'll get a choice? If you have dealings with the government - as any legal immigrant, driving licence or passport holder does - then you'll already have a digital ID whether you like it or not.
A tweak to make that information more publicly usable (such as by employers) is not exactly some giant leap forward.
It seems very obvious to suggest that the RTW and RTR checks are prime targets for this new form of ID. They have much the same issue at present in that you can't be sure that the documentation presented is real. You've taken a photocopy of someone's passport and stored it away, which you think fulfills your legal responsibility, only to be told that it was a fake and you're going to be fined. That is what happened recently to a chip shop who unknowingly hired an illegal immigrant who used a fake British passport.
I know I'd certainly prefer a more secure means of doing this than knowing my employer and letting agent (or worse still, some third party) has a copy of a long expired passport somewhere on file, and potentially vulnerable to cyberattack
Last edited:
FinsburyPark
Member
I think this for two reasons.
1) In the Anglosphere, there is often dislike of ID cards. So by doing a little bit of word salad and calling it a Passport Card, it can negate some of that dislike.
2) The USA has a passport card as well so i guess it provides continuity amongst the angloshpere countries that use it.
Note: In practise its effectively just an EU identity card, albeit with another name
Tetchytyke
Veteran Member
A solution looking for a problem. The techbro backers behind Labour's favourite right-wing think tanks have been pushing for this for years.
And you can be certain that any digital ID scheme will end up being tied to the provisions in the Online Safety Act.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
And you can be certain that any digital ID scheme will end up being tied to the provisions in the Online Safety Act.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
There are subscription services which provide a service to verify whether a document is genuine. We use C6 at work for exactly that purpose.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Being able to prove your age online by way of a simple integration with the Government site is certainly something I would trust with my data far more than the random, sometimes disreputable companies doing it at present, to be honest. This does seem a good use-case for it.
CharlieSpotted
Member
- Joined
- 21 May 2014
- Messages
- 972
A solution looking for a problem... or a vital tool of any sufficently advanced society.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
And here, it is the frankly staggeringly-wrongheaded and reactionary Online Safety Act that's the issue, not ID cards.
Tetchytyke
Veteran Member
A vital tool? Really?
What does a Digital ID system do that we can't already do?
Perhaps, but the Brains Trust that gave us the Online Safety Act are now pushing for Digital ID.
They've been made to look stupid with the Online Safety Act, so now they're doubling down.
And then you've linked your Reddit account with your government ID, and you've linked your account on any number of gentleman's literature websites with your government ID.
All sounds very social credit system to me.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
They're recording that anyway via your IP address/ISP, it's just less transparent. It's only avoided by using a VPN, which of course avoids the Online Safety Act stuff anyway.
Whether you're actually linking it of course depends on how it's implemented - it would be entirely possible to implement an age-verification API that didn't actually record which site the request came from.
Tetchytyke
Veteran Member
And Labour have already flown the kite about banning VPNs.
I'm deeply suspicious of the whole thing.
And like I said, these are third parties who become major cybersecurity targets themselves. Why do we need these middlemen when the government can do the same thing and do a better job of it, given that they are the issuing authority for all of these documents?
I resent the idea of having to give anything to these third party entities (especially those that insist on a video recording of me saying something). I'd much rather have a gov dot uk solution.
I think some tech platforms have been calling for the government to ask Microsoft/Apple/Google to implement device level age verification instead, with sites then being able to use some sort of token on the user's device to confirm whether the person browsing is over 18 or not. I don't know if this would make portions of the internet inaccessible on desktop versions of Linux, but desktop versions of Linux are niche enough that many sites could probably choose to treat any user of it as over 18, or alternatively developers might build some sort of token software into it to bypass age checks on sites. It would be similar to amending the GDPR so that individual sites no longer have to display cookie banners to every new visitor in a browser, and instead browsers will have to allow the user to choose which cookies to opt in/out of.
When it comes to having an ID card, I feel it makes sense, however I do not support requiring people to carry ID at all times (which won't be required under Labour's proposals). Most developed countries outside of the English speaking world have national ID cards, and I think having a universal solution that everyone can use to confirm their age or identity is a lot fairer than the current system the UK (and a few other countries like the US) where there is no national identity card but where people are required to use alternative forms of ID (which not everyone has) such as a choice between a passport and driving licence to prove who they are for certain things.
ArranArchie
Member
I'm on the side of this being a potentially good thing to join up some beaurucracy, but I don't understand how it fits in the context of illegal working. I thought there was already a legal duty on employers to get a passport scan or similar ID proofs? How does this new digital ID thingy prevent people working completely off the books?
berneyarms
Established Member
It is called a “passport card”, because it is issued by the Department of Foreign Affairs. You must either be ordering an Irish passport book at the same time, or you must already have a valid Irish passport to get one, and it costs extra.
It is only valid for a maximum of 5 years (or as long as your passport is in date), and has to be renewed at a cost of EUR 35.
You can use it to travel around the EU and some additional countries in Europe - much handier to have in your wallet than carrying a separate book around.
It is very much optional.
Last edited:
Tetchytyke
Veteran Member
Any government solution will include all these "third party entities" though, as suppliers. That's why the techbro funders of the Labour right are so keen on the process.
I also don't see how a government digital ID will prevent the need for selfies, etc, to be provided. The purpose of the selfie is to ensure that the person opening the account is the person to whom the ID belongs. A digital solution doesn't change that.
And you don't think an all-encompassing digital ID won't be exactly the same?
Imagine the absolute carnage you can cause if you manage to spear-phish or otherwise socially engineer your way into getting hold of someone's digital ID. The scam gangs in Vietnam and Cambodia must be licking their lips.
Doubt it very strongly that a gov doing it directly will be doing it better, politics make very bad specification and purse strings ain't that open.
Especially when it may actually just be subcontracted to one of the existing middleware companies through tender.
This remains to be seen. I do agree that this government is obsessed with giving piles of money to US tech companies, but as of yet we don't know that they will do so for this. I will reserve judgement until those announcements come out.
Video clips are one (dreadful) way in which this could be done, but it doesn't have to be the only way. I've never had to give a video clip to a traditional bank. I could just as easily confirm my identity with a share code issued by the government, for example, and it would not be fiendishly difficult to limit access to that system to FCA-approved banks. Far superior to the normal approach of the birth cert and (printed, not PDF) utility bill.
Social engineering someone out of their own details will always be a factor, but it isn't what I was referring to. Though for a business that needs to undertake identity checks, having a pile of share codes / government verification confirmation reference numbers is far less likely to cause damage than a pile of passport scans.
gov dot uk is one of the few bright spots about this country. Their existing online services tend to work fine. I already have a gov dot uk "onelogin" to access certain services. What would be the big deal about expanding this a bit more?
Anyway, you appear to live in a country that has actual ID cards. Has the sky fallen in yet?
Last edited:
HSTEd
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2011
- Messages
- 20,318
Until of course the government algorithms decide that your social media posts are insufficiently aligned with state ideology and turn your access to social venues off....
And whether or not that is something they are planning, that is certainly something that they would have all the tools necessary to do under this system.
As the other poster said, this digital ID is by far the most expensive and difficult part of introducing a social credit system.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
I think this is heading into conspirababble territory, to be honest. There are some reasonable arguments against that don't descend into that, such as it being costly and not worthwhile in terms of effect, so I'm not sure those arguments are worth using given that their credibility is very limited.
HSTEd
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2011
- Messages
- 20,318
Or using a prepaid SIM for data that is used for nothing else. Especially since such SIMs can be bought with cash.
DoubleLemon
Member
People here obviously haven't suffered the issues of not being able to provide id because it's a **** system.
I may rent a room so no bills to prove address. I don't have a passport or driving license. my room agreement is not acceptable as proof of address.
no bank account.
HMRC regularly mismatch people with data they are given as there is a good chance someone else meets most if not all the same information. the difference could be down to the ni number but the organisation collecting a debt and putting an attachment of earnings didn't ask or require it. so hmrc sometimes get it wrong.
it's a nightmare to fix.
Here is a reddit post covering this issue: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskABrit/comments/1mrshtc/uk_systems_keep_confusing_me_and_my_twin_brother/
I may rent a room so no bills to prove address. I don't have a passport or driving license. my room agreement is not acceptable as proof of address.
no bank account.
HMRC regularly mismatch people with data they are given as there is a good chance someone else meets most if not all the same information. the difference could be down to the ni number but the organisation collecting a debt and putting an attachment of earnings didn't ask or require it. so hmrc sometimes get it wrong.
it's a nightmare to fix.
Here is a reddit post covering this issue: https://www.reddit.com/r/AskABrit/comments/1mrshtc/uk_systems_keep_confusing_me_and_my_twin_brother/
HSTEd
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2011
- Messages
- 20,318
I'm afraid I have little truck with such "its conspiribabble" arguments after the introduction of the Online Safety Act, which (as everyone with a brain knew would happen) resulted in people having to register their ID to even look at material far beyond the claimed purpose of the bill.
CharlieSpotted
Member
- Joined
- 21 May 2014
- Messages
- 972
Indeed, talk of "social credit" and "denying access to social venues" (and there are other examples in this thread) is definitely conspiracy territory.
The problem is conspiracies generally exist because of an absence of information. They seek to fill in the gaps in what we're not being told. (They're often rooted in racism, too, but that's a whole different kettle of fish). The current government is absolutely terrible at clearly communicating the why of what they're doing. That comes right from the top, from a Prime Minister who I believe is an incredibly capable and intelligent man but mass communication is absolutely not in his skillset.
The government should be able to communicate exactly why ID cards are are a good idea, what they're for, and exactly what they're doing to assuage people's doubts about the way it might be used. They're not doing that and, because of that, here comes the conspiracists.
See also : The removal of Winter fuel allowance. A policy that had a perfectly good rationale - they just completely failed to explain it to the population and let others take over the narrative.
The problem is conspiracies generally exist because of an absence of information. They seek to fill in the gaps in what we're not being told. (They're often rooted in racism, too, but that's a whole different kettle of fish). The current government is absolutely terrible at clearly communicating the why of what they're doing. That comes right from the top, from a Prime Minister who I believe is an incredibly capable and intelligent man but mass communication is absolutely not in his skillset.
The government should be able to communicate exactly why ID cards are are a good idea, what they're for, and exactly what they're doing to assuage people's doubts about the way it might be used. They're not doing that and, because of that, here comes the conspiracists.
See also : The removal of Winter fuel allowance. A policy that had a perfectly good rationale - they just completely failed to explain it to the population and let others take over the narrative.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Though only register it with the commercial company providing the content or age verification, not the Government.
I do think the OSA is overreach, but I don't think it's conspiracy, because almost nobody is stupid enough to register their name and address in order to consume illegal content; people doing that are just going to use VPNs or the dark web, whatever that is. And anyone who is that stupid, good, we get to catch them.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
I agree with your point, but I think that's entirely different - I think a large proportion of objectors to that were well-off Boomer pensioners with a nice fat final salary pension who just happened to quite like an extra 200 quid to put towards a cruise or something, but they were raising an argument against it that they knew would succeed despite not applying to them.
HSTEd
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2011
- Messages
- 20,318
Thats because, if you decide that all the other arguments are conspiracies, the only remaining explanation for why the government is doing this is because Tony Blair did it.
The government, when it frequently runs out of ideas, just mindlessly apes Tony Blair.
Tony Blair wanted ID cards and continues to propose them as the "solution" to any problem he can, so now Starmer wants ID cards.
This system will achieve nothing with regards to immigration, its just todays preferred reason that expansion of government control is essential. Just like terrorism was for Blair.
DoubleLemon
Member
Google and facebook already have a very comprehensive and accurate profile about you and your likes and interests. They sell this data - why does the government need an ID card if they can just go to facebook?
You are making up scenarios where if there was a will, it could be done with existing tech. The ID card will not change the polices of the government. The lack of an ID card didn't stop the age verification systems being implemented did they.
You are loosing any bit of credibility you may have had for genuine concerns about data. But the card wont stop the policy nor will it encourage that. Its just getting the same data points a diffrent way. The benefits and simplification to organisations who require id is staggering.
It should also reduce the number of employers taking on those who don't have a right to work in the uk (it wont stop it totally but it should have a dramatic impact).
The card isn't the issue its the policies of the government - having or not having the card wont change that.
You are reaching for scenarios and making predictions based on things that we are doing already or its feasible with current tech. The use of data is a legitimate thing to worry about esp when its going to the usa the lack of an ID card hasn't stopped the direction its been going.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
The main reason to do it is that proving your identity for a DBS check or similar is becoming increasingly difficult, and even more so (if not impossible) for those who neither drive nor travel internationally.
Paper utility bills? Nope.
Paper bank statements? Nope.
Those who by choice still live in the 1990s (of whom there are a fair few people here) may well find things easier, but most of us these days hardly ever get physical documents useful for proof of ID.
Paper utility bills? Nope.
Paper bank statements? Nope.
Those who by choice still live in the 1990s (of whom there are a fair few people here) may well find things easier, but most of us these days hardly ever get physical documents useful for proof of ID.
- Status