Author Topic: A Public Meeting In Swindon - Whose Identity Is It Anyway ?  (Read 13959 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Steve Wakefield

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2566
  • Gender: Male
Re: A Public Meeting In Swindon - Whose Identity Is It Anyway ?
« Reply #20 on: February 14, 2007, 07:53:58 PM »
Geoff hope you soon recover and get something on here. The debate was very good and to be fair to Michael Wills he did come and for me he argued the government's point of view pretty well.

Unfortunately he had to leave after about 45 minutes, but he did attend and he did speak. I think that you should acknowlege that, he had the courage of his convictions to speak out and argue his case.

This is democracy and other Panel Members also spoke out; again they did it fairly and calmly. This was a passionate debate on all sides and was well chaired and  very diciplined and polite.

The public, are very good in this town, they made their points, but they did listen and did not shout anyone down. It was good not to have a "rent a mob," the sort that I have had experience of before in similar situations.

I believe the meeting last night was good, and well organised and I would like to thank all the members of the public who turned up and came out on a wet night. To listen to politicians and other interested parties.

Who said people are not interested in issues in Swindon? last night and previous climate change meeting are proving this is clearly not the case. Can you pass on my thanks to the organisers, who arranged the meeting and the chair. I hope this is not a one off.

For me Lord Stoddart was a show stealer.. I was surprised about the National Children's Register (NCR). From what I gathered last night, it is proposed to have an exemption to it so that the children of celebs and politicians etc will not have their details placed on it, due to "Security Risks"? All children should be treated equally, fairly and equitably and therefore it should be universal, just like child benefit etc is.

I do hope the government will not allow a two tier register. I also admired the 14 year old who asked the panel the question how can I ensure I am not registered on the NCR? No one could answer her, as a politician, it was good to see politicians lost for words... By the way neither could I.  O0
All posts on this forum are my own opinion and do not represent the views of any council or any political party.  :banana:

Offline Alligator

  • Twitter - @Alliflowchart
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1846
  • Gender: Male
Re: A Public Meeting In Swindon - Whose Identity Is It Anyway ?
« Reply #21 on: February 14, 2007, 08:07:13 PM »
For me Lord Stoddart was a show stealer.. I was surprised about the National Children's Register (NCR). From what I gathered last night, it is proposed to have an exemption to it so that the children of celebs and politicians etc will not have their details placed on it, due to "Security Risks"? All children should be treated equally, fairly and equitably and therefore it should be universal, just like child benefit etc is.

I do hope the government will not allow a two tier register. I also admired the 14 year old who asked the panel the question how can I ensure I am not registered on the NCR? No one could answer her, as a politician, it was good to see politicians lost for words... By the way neither could I.  O0

Hear hear to that....personally I hope that the government simply drop the register all together or, failing that, offer an answer to the obvious questions.....why isn't the register secure for all? If the register isn't secure enough for the children of celebrities, then why is it deemed secure for anyone else?  what is a celebrity?, when do you 'become' a celebrity and when do you stop being a celebrity?....I could go on and on and on!

The fact is that leaked data is leaked data, whoever it refers to, if the register isn't safe for all, it isn't worth having.   :censored:

Offline Lynda

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 954
  • "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"
    • NO2ID Swindon
Re: A Public Meeting In Swindon - Whose Identity Is It Anyway ?
« Reply #22 on: February 14, 2007, 08:13:34 PM »
Quote
I was surprised about the National Children's Register (NCR). From what I gathered last night, it is proposed to have an exemption to it so that the children of celebs and politicians etc will not have their details placed on it, due to "Security Risks"? All children should be treated equally, fairly and equitably and therefore it should be universal, just like child benefit etc is.

I do hope the government will not allow a two tier register. I also admired the 14 year old who asked the panel the question how can I ensure I am not registered on the NCR? No one could answer her, as a politician, it was good to see politicians lost for words... By the way neither could I.


Yessss.... the Children's Register... the 'baby' NIR.
For those of you that have or know people under 16.
look here

http://www.arch-ed.org/issues/databases/IS%20Index.htm

Point number 11 is the one that raises the issue of celeb. opt out.








Lynda  NO2ID 07802 151464  Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

Offline ZPW

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1318
  • Bob Wright better do a stellar job
Re: A Public Meeting In Swindon - Whose Identity Is It Anyway ?
« Reply #23 on: February 14, 2007, 08:22:41 PM »

Anne Snelgrove's presence but non-engagement struck me as unfortunate - and more than a little selfish on her behalf.

What was this about?
I saw her there but she left before I'd eaten my custard cream.
Total absence of pink - that was good.

Offline ZPW

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1318
  • Bob Wright better do a stellar job
Re: A Public Meeting In Swindon - Whose Identity Is It Anyway ?
« Reply #24 on: February 14, 2007, 08:24:13 PM »
Despite the strong presence of conservative councillors and party members, there was a good percentage of that audience who were probably once labour voters.

.

Yes.


Offline Steve Wakefield

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2566
  • Gender: Male
Re: A Public Meeting In Swindon - Whose Identity Is It Anyway ?
« Reply #25 on: February 14, 2007, 08:33:20 PM »
Baby NCR, very good and Point 11, very good; thanks for that it is pleasing to know that the NCR is being scrutinised in this way. From what Lord Staddart implied this will affect 15 million children. I find this mind boggling.

The NCR is being set up by the government, but did anyone ask the children? Why can't a child ask for an opt out?

It was interesting to hear Lord Stoddart, say that you can no longer visit your MP, at Westminster; without police permission. What is happening at the mother of all parliaments?
All posts on this forum are my own opinion and do not represent the views of any council or any political party.  :banana:

Offline Lynda

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 954
  • "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"
    • NO2ID Swindon
Re: A Public Meeting In Swindon - Whose Identity Is It Anyway ?
« Reply #26 on: February 14, 2007, 09:27:02 PM »
Baby NCR, very good and Point 11, very good; thanks for that it is pleasing to know that the NCR is being scrutinised in this way. From what Lord Staddart implied this will affect 15 million children. I find this mind boggling.

The NCR is being set up by the government, but did anyone ask the children? Why can't a child ask for an opt out?

It was interesting to hear Lord Stoddart, say that you can no longer visit your MP, at Westminster; without police permission. What is happening at the mother of all parliaments?


several points.
I urge people to read`through the website linked here

http://www.arch-ed.org

on the issue of consent I quote the point made  here

http://www.arch-ed.org/issues/databases/informed_consent.htm

Quote
t is important to consider how – and from whom - consent is gained, and the situation in which it is sought. ‘Informed consent’ means that the person giving it fully understands what they are agreeing to, and feels under no pressure to give a particular response.

As mentioned above, Connexions asks for ‘blanket’ consent to allow information to be put on to a database and allow agencies to access it over a period of time. Is that reasonable? Someone of 14 - and their parents - might be perfectly willing to have information about, say, the young person's dyslexia stored and shared, but if a year later that same young person is going to need help with a drug problem, or become pregnant, how is anyone to foresee the problems that sharing such information may cause?


A child is likely to do as the requesting adult asks.
Even at 14 most children will find it hard to not comply with a seemingly reasonable request from an adult.
They are no differnt from adults when it comes to promulgating the ramifictaions of that consent.
It is may be reasonable to a child for their education records to be shared, it is less likely they will want to share the fact that they have had , say a termination or anti-depressants. Once consent id given, the matter is unlikely to be revisited.


Visiting parliament... now there's a thing.
The obscenity of asking for permission to protest against those one needs permission from ( or their agents) is unspeakable. Unspeakable.
Brain Haw and his supporters stand for all of us.
Next time you are at Westminster, please take time to talk to him, he's there for all of us.
Interestingly, Tate Britain now has an exhibit of the items ( a container full ) raided from Brians camp by the very agents we must now doff our caps to.
And there's another question... What is Art?






Lynda  NO2ID 07802 151464  Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

Offline Lynda

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 954
  • "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"
    • NO2ID Swindon
Re: A Public Meeting In Swindon - Whose Identity Is It Anyway ?
« Reply #27 on: February 14, 2007, 09:34:52 PM »

Anne Snelgrove's presence but non-engagement struck me as unfortunate - and more than a little selfish on her behalf.

What was this about?
I saw her there but she left before I'd eaten my custard cream.
Total absence of pink - that was good.


I assure you that Anne Snelgrove was invited to speak.
She was only able to give the meeting 30 minutes and offered to attend from 19.30 for half an hour.
Out of respect to the audience and the other speakers we asked Ms Snelgrove if she would like to come for the half hour that would allow her to make her speech and take some audience questions.
This was not possible for her and her office ( Jude ) let us know that Anne wouldn't be able to come after all.
Do not doubt that we did our utmost to shift around to allow her to take questions from those that attended.

Ms Snelgrove came briefly to the Pilgrim centre last night but left before the meeting started.
I am not sure why she came.

I'm sure her departure was nothing to do with you ZPW.

It was excellent to that Michael Wills was able to come and did come.






Lynda  NO2ID 07802 151464  Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

Offline Simon

  • Jnr. Jedi
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2274
    • Swindon Climate Action Network
Re: A Public Meeting In Swindon - Whose Identity Is It Anyway ?
« Reply #28 on: February 15, 2007, 03:35:32 PM »
It was interesting to hear Lord Stoddart, say that you can no longer visit your MP, at Westminster; without police permission. What is happening at the mother of all parliaments?


It's not strictly true. I'm not sure what the rules are about visiting your MP, but there are sections of the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 which make it unlawful to participate in or organise a "demonstration" within an exclusion zone around parliament, without getting authorisation from the police beforehand. Said sections were hurriedly tacked on to an unrelated bill in an attempt to get rid of Brian Haw's peace camp, but were so sloppily drafted that they don't even define what a "demonstration" is.

There's a detailed history of all the antics surrounding that silly law since it was passed at http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2006/12/358863.html - well worth a read.
We are all in this together, but some of us are more in it than others (with apologies to George Orwell)

Offline Lynda

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 954
  • "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"
    • NO2ID Swindon
Re: A Public Meeting In Swindon - Whose Identity Is It Anyway ?
« Reply #29 on: February 16, 2007, 12:37:25 PM »
this letter in the Adver. sets out the exchanges between us and Anne Snelgrove .

http://devel.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/news/swindonletters/display.var.1198659.0.we_all_welcome_mps_id_meeting.php


Quote
We all welcome MP’s ID meeting

Regarding MP Anne Snelgrove's letter, (MP welcomes ID card debate, SA, February 13), I'd like to correct Anne's somewhat misleading statements about the Whose Identity Is It Anyway? public meeting held on Tuesday.

Anne's invitation to speak at the meeting was extended to her on January 1, and declined by her office on January 8 because of a pre-existing engagement.

On January 9, I wrote and asked whether she would be able to address the meeting if its date could be moved to February 16, then Anne confirmed she could attend the first 30 minutes of the original meet.
advertisement

As the first 45 minutes of the meeting were scheduled for the panelists to give their views on the National Identity Register and Identity Cards, and the rest of the meeting given over to the audience asking questions of the panel, it would obviously be odd for a panelist to give their views then leave the meeting without answering questions, and somewhat disrespectful to the other panelists and members of the audience.

We offered a compromise solution whereby Anne could arrive towards the end of the speeches, address the audience, then stay for the first half of audience questions before leaving the meeting early.

Resolution was reached the very next day when an email from Anne's office stated very clearly: "It just won't be possible for Anne to come for the whole meeting, so we'd better say no."

The decision for Anne not to join the panel was obviously hers, and not ours although her letter clearly suggests the contrary.

Our invitation for Anne to join either the panel, or the audience, was always open and without time limitation, so her statement that we have invited her to: "join the audience for the first half-hour", sounds very much like we tried to discourage her attendance, when the very opposite is true. We tried in every way we could to encourage and enable her to speak on equal terms with the other panelists.

I welcome Anne's intention to hold a public meeting of her own, although I would urge her to confirm that she actually intends to invite and answer questions from an assembled audience at her meeting.

If she really intends to properly engage with her constituents over these important issues, she's assured a good attendance at her meeting.

G Reid.

The Prinnels, Swindon
Lynda  NO2ID 07802 151464  Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

Offline Dougal

  • Administrator
  • Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 527
    • Talkswindon.org
Re: A Public Meeting In Swindon - Whose Identity Is It Anyway ?
« Reply #30 on: January 27, 2009, 07:39:26 PM »

Bump.


Just a reminder that the video taken at the meeting was published here: http://www.talkswindon.org/index.php?topic=1323.0
www.talkswindon.org is a venue, not a person or political entity. As such, it hopes to encourage input and discussion on any topic, from all walks of Swindon life.