The latest wheeze from the database state is a plan to insist that voters hand over their NI number and signature before being allowed to vote.
Every Briton will be asked to hand over their National Insurance number and signature to keep their right to vote, under new plans.
The information will be added to local electoral registers and held at city halls across the country, raising concerns about the security of the data. The Government also admitted that the new plans could discourage people from voting.
Well whodathunkit? I would certainly not wish to hand over my NI number to be added to the electoral register. This document is sold on and an NI number is useful to identity thieves – as, indeed, is a copy of a signature. That the data is sold is itself a disgrace.
Last night campaigners sounded the alarm about the plans, which are to be introduced after July, suggesting that the breadth of information which will be held by councils will present “the perfect kit for identity fraud”.
Did I just say that? Oh, yes, I did.
Electoral administrators said they were concerned that the extra information could be made available to people who purchase copies of the electoral register.
Oh, I just said that, too. Now, if upon seeing the tagline to this article causes me to reach such an obvious conclusion within a matter of seconds – and before reading into the depth of the article, just how readily will those identity thieves be rubbing their hands with glee? It’s a stupid idea. Almost as stupid as Michael Cross and his “let’s dish out registration details and mobile phone numbers to any thieving twat who wants them” idiocy. It seems that the more technology advances, the more stupid ideas get thrown into the cauldron. And this one is up there with the bats’ eyes and frogs’ legs.
The new requirement for people to provide additional “personal identifiers” when they register to vote has been brought in by the Government to cut down on voter fraud at local and general elections.
Ah, yes, electoral fraud. A huge problem that. Apart from postal fraud (and, strangely, it has been the Labour party that has the whiff of corruption) this is a non-issue that doesn’t warrant any special attention.
However, after July electoral registration officers will be able to ask all householders to hand over three “personal identifiers” – their signatures, dates of birth and NI numbers – as part of a new “individual elector registration” (IER) scheme, along with names and addresses.
I am no longer on a UK electoral register (that didn’t stop them sending Mrs L a jury summons, though…). If I was, I would most certainly not hand over this information to be held in one place – a place that is routinely sold to any Tom Dick or Harry who wants to flog unwanted tat to the unwitting householder. I would forego my vote sooner than give identity thieves such valuable information – besides, I’m rapidly coming to the conclusion that voting only encourages the bastards.
There are fears that this could be expanded to include identity cards and even people’s finger-prints because of a special allowance in the legislation used to bring in the change.
Like we didn’t see this one coming… Give the buggers a millimetre and they seize parsec and a half.
John Turner, the association’s [of electoral administrators] chief executive, said: “People should have concerns if their personal data is made available for anyone with a big enough cheque. The more personal data on the register, the more sensitive they will become.”
Quite so. Is anyone listening, though?
Campaigners questioned whether it was worth the risks of storing this extra personal information to deal with what they said was the relative small problem of electoral fraud.
Again, indeed so. We are talking about a non-problem here. A miniscule (or should the be minuscule? – sorry, couldn’t reisist) issue. But then, when it comes to the database state, we are always talking about a non-problem with a Kango to fix it. What matters is data gathering for its own sake and to use as a tool of control. Whatever benefits there may be in this idea, it is not, never was and never will be for our benefit. It is for the administrators, the politicians and the civil service – the control freaks, not us.
Alex Deane, a spokesman from civil liberties group Big Brother Watch, said: “We have managed to have elections in this country without surrendering this sort of information for hundreds of years.”
Yes, well, habeas corpus has been ditched after hundreds of years, not to mention the erosions of the right to silence, trial by jury, freedom of speech, freedom of association, presumption of innocence… I could go on, but what’s the point? That these things evolved with a good purpose is lost on the managerialists and bureaucrats who make up law to suit themselves.
Is it any wonder I get depressed?
*facepalm*
It is irritating how inevitable this all seems.
.-= My last blog ..The weapon of freedom =-.
Yup classic New Labour.
Mess something up (i.e. the tradition that you vote in person) and replace it with postal votes. Massive fraud ensues. Now, the sensible person would say “OK, we tried postal voting and it went wrong, so let’s just put an end to postal voting”.
Nope.
Instead, they invent yet more data collection and hurdles, which will not deter postal vote fraudsters (who have days or weeks to find out NI number) and put off those voters who normally vote in person on the way to or from work, and who don’t have their NI number with them.
So this move will in relative numbers increase the amount of fraudulent votes compared to genuine ones.
Sorted!!
You’d almost think… Nah, that’s paranoia…
Re postal vote fraud:
“strangely, it has been the Labour party that has the whiff of corruption”.
I suspect that the Labour involvement is contingent on their historical domination of municipal politics in big cities, and is nothing much to do with either socialism or New Labour. The postal voting frauds seem generally to have been promoted by political operators in Asian communities who have imported the Pakistani political model of clan-based machines. Such power brokers have atached themselves to Labour because that puts them in the ruling group on big-city councils. And their relative power depends on their ability to deliver a solid community vote.
Last night campaigners sounded the alarm about the plans, which are to be introduced after July, suggesting that the breadth of information which will be held by councils will present “the perfect kit for identity fraud”.
After Juy is interesting – I should have thought they’d try to rush this through.
.-= My last blog ..The Blogger =-.
“Is it any wonder I get depressed?”
Nope. What depresses me is that the Conservatives seem to have forgotten about civil liberties in the run-up to the election when this sort of outrage would make for perfect electoral fodder.
.-= My last blog ..At least John Redwood is thinking outside the box =-.
If this information must be surrendered in order to register to vote, then they’ve got you, because they can and do send people to jail for refusing to register to vote. Imagine the scenario. You dutifully fill in your form, omitting the NI number. You get a letter saying that your registration has not been accepted. This goes on for a while until you are summoneds. First you get a helfty fine and a criminal record. Eventually you go to jail for six months. These cunts aren’t playing games.