EMBARGOED until 00:01 Monday, 23 March 2009

Campaign group NO2ID [1], originator of the slogan ‘Stop the database state’, is vindicated by a new report published today by the Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust Ltd [2].

The report, commissioned from a group of leading academics, industry and privacy experts, concludes that more than 8 out of 10 national government databases managing major public service functions present serious dangers to privacy and should either be scrapped completely or the schemes stopped and be subject to a major overhaul.

Of the 46 databases considered by the report, the authors conclude only 6 are broadly acceptable in privacy terms, and more than 10 should be scrapped entirely, including the ID card scheme, the centralisation and sharing of all health records by the NHS, and the ‘children’s databases’ – ContactPoint and the electronic Care Assessment Framework (eCAF).

Phil Booth, National Coordinator of NO2ID [2] said:

This survey shows just how vast the database state has grown while your back was turned. It threatens the privacy, personal security and freedom of everyone in the UK.
Government now sees collecting and collating information about the people as a primary function: snooping is the first resort. To stop the database state, the surveillance reflex must be changed.

-ENDS-

Notes for editors:

1) NO2ID is the UK-wide non-partisan campaign against ID cards and the database state. See http://www.no2id.net/dbstate.php for a list of ‘database
state’ initiatives that NO2ID is actively opposing, and http://www.no2id.net/datasharing for how it all fits together.
The term ‘the database state’ was first used in this context in 2004 by Guy Herbert, NO2ID’s present general secretary.

2) Foundation for Information Policy Research, ‘Database State: a report for the Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust Ltd’ (York; 2009)
See: http://www.jrrt.org.uk/index.php?page=publications

20 March 2009

The publication of the 2003 and 2004 Office of Government Commerce ‘gateway reviews’ of the ID scheme reveals what it is that the government fought to hide for 5 years [1]. The reviews were RED and AMBER. That is ministers were at the same time promoting a scheme that at that point had not met the basic criteria for any large government project.

Guy Herbert, General Secretary of NO2ID [2]said:

The truth is, that though the details are damning, no one but specialists would have noticed anything in these reports but two words. Senior civil servants have spent thousands of hours of their time, and hundreds of thousands of pounds on legal fees, trying to stop the public seeing the words ‘red’ and ‘amber’. The other two words that spring to mind are ‘cat’ and ‘bag’.

-ENDS-

Notes for editors:

1) The reviews were the subject of a Freedom of Information request by security consultant Mark Dziecielewski, that took over 4 years, eventually involving the Court of Appeal and two hearings by the Information Tribunal, to be answered:
http://p10.hostingprod.com/@spyblog.org.uk/blog/2009/03/ogc-finally-publish-the-two-stage-zero-gateway-reviews-of-the-id-cards-programme.html

2) NO2ID is the UK-wide non-partisan campaign against ID cards and the database state. See http://www.no2id.net/dbstate for a list of ‘database state’ initiatives that NO2ID is actively opposing, and http://www.no2id.net/datasharing for how it all fits together.