Thought you didn't need to show ID in the UK? Wrong One of the first things Britain's home secretary Theresa May did on taking office was to abolish the previous government’s identity cards scheme. But while she made ID cards history, she is in the process of extending Britain’s range of identity document checks. The "sample" UK ID card from the previous government's 2008 …
The only ID the 9/11 'hijackers' required was from the Pentagon. I CANNOT BELIEVE there's someone erudite enough to read El Reg who STILL believes that 9/11 was anything other than an inside job designed to garner support for the illegal Iraqi invasion.
And here was I thinking I was amongst like-minded erudite, urbane and sociopolitically aware entities... Looks like I may have to revise that opinion.
As for ID, I have none; I have a disability which precludes me from holding a driving licence, and I can't afford a new passport (where they think a disabled person who, by accident of misfortune, happens to be stuck in probably one of - if not THE - most expensive area in the entire country - is going to find £200+ I've no fecking idea! My financial situation is somewhat precarious; I stand to lose more than 50% of what they currently permit me because, when they introduce PIP (personal 'independence' payment - which is a total farce as many disability charities and organisations reckon that less than 0.1% of those currently in receipt of DLA will qualify! 'Independence payment', my arse!)).
Even if I COULD afford a new passport, I'm not sure I'd apply for one as, the way this country is rapidly becoming a 21st century version of '30s Germany applying would probably be an extremely invasive experience (full cavity searches I shouldn't wonder!).
Call me paranoid if you will, but we all know this ain't a democracy (it's not even pretending anymore!).
This will only begin to resemble summat like a democracy when we get shot of those parasitic inbreds! A 'democratic monarchist state' is an oxymoron.
Okay, rant over. Hopefully, you're all used to me and my Opinions by now... XXX <3
I turned up at Luton Airport from my work abroad, I had a reserved rental car from _____ , I produced my internet easyjet car booking, my UK passport, my UK driving license AND the fiddly paper-bit, my UK credit-card - the rental guy did some typing - computer says no.
'Nah mate - can't rent you this car, you've got no data footprint in the UK' - but even tho I had a handful of tangible, valid, legal hard identity tokens I was being denied a service in the UK due to a missing soft-identity. This has happened at different UK airports to colleagues of mine with a similar work situation, nominally being based in the UK, including a postal address - but required by my employer to be physically present overseas. I have no debts in UK, no mortgage, but I do have full bank account.
This explains parenthetically why I could never guess the stupid Braklays Bonk/Experian captchas when trying to buy stuff online, I guess my credit-file is pure junk, I've never lived in any of the addresses that it throws-up, but that's not an option that leads to a completed shopping purchase.
Welcome to the digital age, forget this irrelevant token based hard id, GIVE US YOUR METADATA!
I was on my way to an ISO/IEC Standards working group meeting on Machine Readable Travel Documents hosted by the Home Office! When I mentioned this discrimination to the meeting it was pointed out by an expert from the Bundesamt für Sicherheit in der Informationstechnik that, as others below have mentioned, it's purely due to Blighty's lack of a population register. "This would never happen in Germany!"
We can take from this that UK does have a 'virtual' population register - service offered by the Data-Broker community.....
"...it's purely due to Blighty's lack of a population register. "This would never happen in Germany!"
Well, on the other side Germany's cities and district offices who hold the population registers make quite a bit of money by selling address data to companies, with little leeway for individuals to prevent this.
The only reason for the existence of population registers in Germany is that it gives the state more control over its citizens. Dare you living somewhere without anyone knowing.
I thought it was more to do with taxes, and somewhat to do with levels of legal autonomy. It's more about the equivalent of local councils being able to collect payments for utilities based on who uses them.
In the Netherlands at least, you have to register if you're staying in an area (over 4 months I think is considered staying rather than visiting) and there are firm rules on where you can and can't register from. Essentially you have to be a tenant or owner of some residential property.
If you're registered as living there, getting tax and ID is pretty easy. They have a digital ID that acts as a formal ID for online interactions like applying for university, getting bank accounts or insurance.
This might sound a little crazy, but I put more faith in the German or Dutch states wanting my data for good purposes, like planning and supplying services. Not that any of my data is ever going to be private from a State :)
>>The only reason for the existence of population registers in Germany is that it gives the state more control over its citizens. Dare you living somewhere without anyone knowing.
You are joking? UK has the electoral roll and companies trawl through that all the time, no cost I believe. I imagine you have got a National Insurance Number, since birth and, if you ever have a child, you may be pleased by the sudden attention you receive from firms selling items for new parents. Do you pay taxes? Drive a motor vehicle? Live in a house or flat?
I live, now, in another country where we are all registered. In practice, I feel much more free as I am not asked constantly who and what I am and, if I do need some state service, it is much faster and more efficient to provide it to me. I certainly seem to be less subject to petty checks and questions than in UK, where every jumped-up petty bureaucrat, private or state, and policeman demands that I prove who I am at the drop of a hat, because I could be a terrorist or a con man or "rules".
All that UK does is fragment the system between state and private (barely regulated) bodies, creating endless scope for abuse, mistakes, duplication, irritation and inefficiency. This gives the worst of all worlds, with bells on. Google and Tesco are the only ones really good at pulling this all into one place and having accurate data on just about everyone in the country, probably including most illegal immigrants.
Another supposedly "useful" data footprint is now apparently your credit record. A while back the local council were questioning whether I was eligible for the single occupancy discount on my council tax (I am). They were arguing that they weren't sure if I was actually living at the address in question, or if anyone else was living there. There explanation for raising these questions was because they were unable to locate any recent credit activity at that address. This was for a very good reason, I'd engaged in no activity in recent years that would result in a credit check. It took a reasonably lengthy fight with the council and getting my local councillor involved to get them to back down and stop demanding "evidence" I refused to provide, primarily because, as I explained to them, it would be trivially simple to produce "evidence" that calmed their fears but did not objectively prove that I was entitled to the discount.
Ever tried Lloyds Bank International's telephone banking? Many questions, all answered truthfully and then told that they can not verify you - every time. Now they tell me, to do certain transactions one can use ONLY telephone banking, not even a signed letter or email.
"Rob Andrew, joint project manager for the partnership, says that the town’s venues saw the wide range of Pass-approved card designs as confusing."
Maybe I'm missing something blindingly obvious ... but why on earth did the Pass scheme not mandate one single design (or possibly two, depending on the age bracket) for all cards produced?
Was n't that the national Identity Card that our freedom-loving parliament vetoed in favour of the much more pervasive, confusing and hidden collection of much more data? Anyway, think of all the money to be made by private issuers, the state for passports etc. and so on. Think of all the loopholes now open for the state or any private firm to deny you something or suspect you because your particular form of identity paper is not recognised.
Past the age? Don't you believe it. No sireeeeee....
My local ASDA asked for my ID a few months ago when I tried to buy a bottle of wine (yeah I know but they were the only place open at the time). I'm 60 years old. They quoted all sorts of laws that require then to get positive ID. I asked to see the min writing. Naturally a standoff ensued. Even the manager said, 'I can see you are over 25 but I am afraid it is more than my jobsworth to sell you the wine without positive proof.
ASDA shops countrywide are not on my personal DO NOT SHOP list. Tesco joined them earlier this week.
Past the age? Don't you believe it. No sireeeeee....
Our local Waitrose has just been "upgraded" and among the changes is "improved QuickCheck/QuickPay" terminals. One of the "improvements" is that if you have the temerity to attempt to purchase alcohol via QuickCheck then lights start flashing and the screen tells you to wait for an assistant to come to vaerify your age (n.b. to use QuickCheck you have had to use a credit card to release the scanner when you arrived and then again to identify yourself to the quick check machine). This is just one of the increasingly long list of aspects of our "new improved Watirose" that we've found to be much worse than it was before the changes (and its only been reopenned for 4 days!)
Don't expect to have any places left that you can shop.
I've been IDed in most decent places recently (but so far not Sainsbury's, I imagine that is simply down to luck). I'm healthy and in my 30's, so I don't look old but do not have the appearance of a teenager. I never agree that I "shouldn't take offence" at being asked to prove that I'm older than my mid-teens. It may be a (sort of) compliment for women but being called possibly a 17 year old is an INSULT to men in their twenties and older. Especially when challenged by someone much younger.
Challenge 21/25/200, is stupid, asking someone who looks much older than the legal age to prove that they are in fact older than the legal age. And then refusing them if they happen to be with someone who cannot proove their age as well. It's especially annoying when the sales clerk says "you look much older than 18, but it's challenge 25 here", they know I'm of legal age but still have to check because I might be a different age. It seems to be just enforcing a policy of ID for alcohol for everyone but by the back door.
On my last trip to a UK supermarket, one older lush had the answer.
Get a plastic cup, park yourself in the corner table facing the wall. Then surreptitiously fill it from a bottle purloined from the booze section.
I was sitting there 'stretching' what they called 'coffee' and the guy finished the whole bottle before I finished my drink!
I don't think they can enforce this. Correct me if I'm wrong but if I offer to pay for my purchases and they refuse to accept it (for whatever reason) I may leave with the items in my bag and it's their responsibility to send me an invoice.
I did this once a few years ago after waiting thirty minutes for a till to be fixed. In the end I got an apologetic letter from the manager and was allowed to keep my shopping for free.
> Correct me if I'm wrong but if I offer to pay for my purchases and they refuse to accept it (for whatever reason) I may leave with the items in my bag and it's their responsibility to send me an invoice.
You're wrong.....
The shop has the right to refuse to serve anyone, for any reason, they don't even have to tell you the reason (and if they do, they might open themselves up to charges of discrimination).
Tangent: Actually, it's all a little bit weird. You'll often hear people say "Well the shelf says it's £x.xx so you have to sell it at that price". In reality, from a legal sense, the price on the shelf is considered an offer to negotiate. Most shops will just adjust the price if the shelf is showing lower (because deliberately mislabelling would upset Trading Standards) but they don't actually have to.
The point is, you offering to pay for something isn't enough. The retailer has to be willing to enter into the contract to (that, after all is what a sale is - exchange of a consideration for goods/services). If they're not willing, then you walking out without paying is theft.
You'd hope most retailers would take the sensible line and apologise and/or invoice, but you're really opening yourself up if you do this too regularly, they could equally well decide that they can't be arsed with invoicing and report you for shoplifting instead.
IANAL, but did study law a little while back
I don't think you're right about the shelf price thing. I worked in a super market as a student and we were told that we had to charge the display price (be it a shelf price or in those days a sticker price) or the shop could face a hefty fine. In fact the shop where I worked was done for this at least once.
I think the "invitation to treat' holds true and they don't have to sell something at an obviously wrong price but otherwise it could come under "The Control of Misleading Advertisements Regulations" so most shops will charge the lower price rather than risk a prosecution/pissing off the customer.
During the height of the "knifecrime" government distraction - I mean, hysteria - I was asked for ID in Tesco for buying some serving spoons, because knifecrime!
a) I'm 43 (and I look it)
b) They're fucking spoons.
At that point, I decided expecting anything other than a particularly petty police state was folly.
A valid response to being denied for not having your entire life printed on government approved and stamped documentation when at a supermarket checkout is to say
"That's fine. I'll come back later when you've come to your senses" and leave your full trolley for them to put all the stuff back on the shelves.
Rinse and repeat.
I was in a branch of a well known DIY store with my 12-year old son. They seem to only have self check-out tills these days. Being 12 he wanted to put the items through the till. All was well until we came to a set of putty knives (about 100mm long and made of flexible plastic). For this the till needed approval. The large, steel brick bolster had gone through without complaint....
PS B&Qs self service tills are by far the worse I have ever used. They are a complete heap of junk.....
Our B&Q still has ONE checkout desk and I use that regardless of the queue as a form of protest at lost jobs. Checkout jobs may not be wonderful but they are still jobs. Our Sainsburys has yet to install even one self checkout but I expect it is only a matter of time. I will boycott it when it comes in. The Co-Op show no sign of introducing them and I have never been asked for ID there. It might help that I'm a member and carry my Co-Op card at all times so they know who I am.
I honestly don't get the full on hate for 'ID cards'. Honestly I'd love if Australia brought out a Federal ID card. I recently became legally blind and had to hand in my drivers licence... coz you know can't drive anymore.
Trust me, you really, really, miss having access to the defacto ID card that is a drivers licence. Passports just aren't as easy to carry around (if you've got a current one, which I don't), and other ID is hit and miss if it will be accepted, and even when it is it's generally not worth as 'much' as a drivers licence.
Try opening a bank account recently without a drivers licence? It's hellish.
I can understand people not wanting to have a mandatory ID scheme in place, especially those that grew up under dictatorships, but honestly an optional government recognised ID would be worth it's weight in gold. Hell they could even offer one that had all your different government 'permits' (drivers, truck, firearms, etc.) all on the same card.
it's simple - this is Britain. The basic principle is that everyone is free to do what they want, without interference by the state, so long as they are not actually breaking the law. If I want to buy X (unless it's a gun) and I have legal tender to pay for it, it's no-ones business but my own what my name is.
Providing there is no intent to defraud then I can legally call myself anything I want, so what is the point of ID? The concept of 'fake' ID is an interesting one once you realise that - if I have an ID card that says my name is Zaphod Beeblebrox and my date of birth is 3 days after my actual DOB, then that IS a valid ID providing that I'm calling myself Zaphod when I use it, providing I'm not using it to claim that today is my birthday and I'm entitled to a free pizza (which would be fraudulent).
Rights & justification - lol. Rights can easily* be changed & justification is whatever they say it is.
*except on rare occasions when some politicians act like they've actually got principles...
It's all very well saying this is Britain and you can do what you like within in the law, but let's face it these days that isn't very much.
===== This is Britain ….
That must be why some people had difficulty taking photographs in public places.
That must be why police visit people because some silly neighbour thought someone's behaviour "odd".
That must be why men near a school or playground had better be prepared to justify why they are relaxing on a bench, in the sunshine, reading a book.
That must be why police meet trains of holiday makers arriving in Newquay to reject or report to their parents and schools youngsters who do not meet with their approval.
That must be why British police seem to be shorn-headed and dressed as paramilitary occupation forces (I'm an ex policeman from when policeman were of the people and not apart from the people). Do n't tell me that life today is more dangerous: look at the figures. It is not. But the police are.
That must be why May and Cameron make stupid statements and want to control the press by statute.
one quick fix: make it a requirement that those demanding to see your ID have to show their own equivalent ID to you first - so if a council official for example wants to see a bank statement, they have to show you their own bank statement first; if someone in a shop wants a proof-of-age with your name and DOB on it, and won't accept your work ID, then they have to show you their own personal ID first.
I find it quite ironic that Britain has this historical hate of ID cards while every corner of every street in the country is constantly under CCTV surveillance. Surely if the people are truly free to do what they want, they wouldn't authorise everyone to film their whereabouts ? Who's worried about having their picture on a laminated card when a quick scan through the last hour of CCTV footage can positively track you around the place ? Never have I been feeling more spied on that when transferring through Heathrow and getting very nearly anal-probed by the security staff there... It's like not having an ID card is seen as the last bastion of privacy in a country where there is scarcely any left in the first place.
This post has been deleted by its author
I could, actually, get behind a voluntary ID scheme provided two specific things were discussed and planned for:
First, anti-fraud/ID theft mechanisms. It has to be shown that the data cannot be easily stolen and doesn't provide a "one stop shop" for fraudsters. Last thing we need is a situation where a criminal can take a single card from you and then masquerade as you in *all* regards.
Secondly, data ownership - It must be the case that the State does not own the metadata generated by the system and that data controllers (those you hand the data too) have no right to retain that data indefinitely. The data ownership must remain with the individual who is the legal holder of the card and that data cannot be changed without the card and cardholder both being present and the consent of the cardholder being implicitly given, much like we would use a debit/credit card now. Furthermore any data handed over should come with a specific lease from the legal owner; a data on which that data MUST be deleted by the data controller, perhaps at the end of a contract or immediately after a transaction has been made and authorised. If you get on a plane then your data is verified and immediately deleted (this can be done by certs. held on the card, in a similar way to SSL certs, for instance, requiring no "central authority" to constantly check against but instead using a hashing algorithm). If you're renting a property then the landlord could be legally permitted, even possibly required, to retain the leased data for the duration of the tenacy and a given period afterwards.
Take the system out of the hands of the government and the "secret database" fans and we might, just might, be able to cut a deal.
As always, there is a wee loophole. All a prospective tenant has to say is 'Civis Britannicus sum' then the landlord can't do any more checks, as there is no requirement for a British subject to have a passport, which is the only official document that proves nationality and right of abode. Are the government saying that British subjects must take a foreign holiday before they're allowed to rent a flat?
And they're now thinking of requiring GPs to do the same checks before they treat you.
Simples - check documents at the border, after that it doesn't matter. And if the Home Secretary/Daily Mail really, really think the foriners need to be easily identifiable then rivet a dayglo 'DANGER: ALIEN' steel collar round their neck with a flashing red light on it and built in GPS and siren that sounds continuously.
This post has been deleted by its author
It's been years since I had a valid passport. I had a provisional drivers license ... about 20 years ago. About the only means of identification I have is my birth certificate, and I'm not sure if that even qualifies for the sort of checks being proposed, as it doesn't bear my photo, current or otherwise.
I suppose that makes me an "alien", anecdotal evidence to the contrary notwithstanding.
Which planet will they deport me to, I wonder?
"It's been years since I had a valid passport."
Same here. I do, however, have a driving licence but I've never felt the need to pay for a new photo type one when the old paper one is still more or less readable and is valid until age 70 or something so won't cost me for a replacement every 10 years.
The only photo ID I have is my works ID badge. It's laminated but looks like it was printed on an old 75dpi inkjet printer, ie it looks just like what anyone could knock for themselves at home (although a home made one would probably look better!)
Every single time I have stayed in any hotel in any other country, including Europe and Ireland, I have had to provide ID, usually in the form of a passport. In most of the places they photocopied it.
22 of the European member states are also signatories of the Schengen Convention (not the UK or Ireland). This requires all hotels and other commercial accommodation to have foreign guests complete, in their own hand, a registration form and provide valid identification documents.
Spouses, children and travel groups have different requirements.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
