Agenda item

Motion submitted by Councillor Tierney regarding Digital ID.

Councillor Tierney presented a motion on Digital ID cards, seconded by Councillor Miscandlon.

Members made the following comments:

·         Councillor Boden said in principal he has nothing against digital IDs, but the problem is the practice, and he is concerned the data collected would be utilised for purposes that nobody would agree with. This would be the largest IT exercise since the NHS system was upgraded and that was disastrous. He cannot see Government getting the IT right in this instance; it is not practical, now is not the right time and there is not the ability to commission it effectively, so he will support the motion.

·         Councillor Taylor said how many IDs do people require? People already have a lot of ID, and digital ID is just a form of control. He will fully support the motion.

·         Councillor Purser said he is in favour of ID cards but only in a voluntary capacity and he believes digital ID could potentially be a lifesaver. He wears an SOS Talisman that is not big enough for all the medical information he needs to have on it but in an emergency, he is identifiable with information that could potentially save his life. He does not feel information such as medication, allergies and emergency contact details are confidential. Much is said about data protection and breaches of privacy, and most people carry personal information on their passports so he cannot see what is wrong with a digital ID card. He has heard the argument that ID can be cloned, but so can driving licences and credit cards etc. and the information from these can be used for criminal purposes already. ID can prove who you are rather than who you are not. Therefore, as it is his view that an ID card could potentially safe a life, he cannot support this motion.

·         Cllr Nawaz stated that ID cards are an excellent idea for North Korea and China. The system began harmlessly enough in China, but evolved to a point where the authorities now record citizens’ behaviour, including their banking and employment history, whether they are behind in payments or been in an accident etc. The information is analysed to calculate a score, the highest scores provides perks, lower scores leading to restriction placed on daily life. In his view, digital ID will leave individuals vulnerable to blackmail or fraud. The NHS will be producing the genome visit of everyone in the next ten years which will be linked to the digital ID card. He does not trust this government and wants to keep the freedoms this country has fought for, so he supports this motion.

·         Councillor Roy said that he fully supports this motion; society is entering a time that will be different to that which all here have experienced in their lifetimes and the freedoms that are given up today will never be known by the generations to come. 

·         Councillor Hoy said she used to believe that if you have done nothing wrong then you have nothing to hide. However, on reflection if asked to provide access to her bank account, her response would be she does not want someone looking at her information. It is important that people have a right to privacy She never used to worry about overreach but as time goes on she becomes more sceptical. Digital systems can go wrong and they can be hacked; this is evidenced all the time on social media. The Horizons scandal is a case in point; people took their own lives over a computer system that went wrong. She does not think digital ID will stop migration which the Government are saying it will.

·         Councillor Booth said in his youth he was more against ID cards but now if there was one, that would be better, but the problem is the mission creep that could happen. Councillor Purser gave an impassioned speech about medical data and he understands his argument, but this is about the right to work and anti-immigration rhetoric. All parties are trying to use it for their own ends. The whole thing will be an expensive waste of time; it will not deliver what it intended and is a waste of public money so he will support the motion.

·         Councillor Cutler said Councillor Tierney has said it all quite clearly regarding digital ID and she fully supports the motion.

·         Councillor Miscandlon referred to Councillor Hoy’s point and said earlier this year the Government gave authority to look at private bank accounts. ID cards had a purpose in the Second World War, but the NHS IT system and Horizon scandal are classic examples of this country’s abysmal record and he is sure that FDC’s IT team know how many people have tried to hack this council. He fully supports this motion; digital ID is going nowhere and will cost an absolute fortune and Councillor Tierney is right to bring this motion forward.

Councillor Tierney thanked members for their comments and an interesting debate. He agreed that a good outcome would be for digital ID not to work, if it works then that will be when things gets bad and a tool is just a tool until it gets into the hands of someone you do not want it to. Imagine the worst government who could have access to that information; it may sound like a conspiracy theory, but it is possible. ID cards were wound down after WW2 because there was no longer a need for them and in the words of George Orwell, ‘imagine a boot standing on the human face – forever’.

The motion was approved.