This is a site designed to make it easier to take the core of large published reports and allow anyone to comment on them.


  • enhance checks as part of safeguarding for the vulnerable: the Scheme will introduce a high level of efficiency in authentication of identity, and this will significantly support checks on people working with children and the most vulnerable; and

Email this to a friend.
Previous itemNext item.


Does Mrs Jones want to know that this person claiming to be John Smith is in fact John Smith, or that this person claiming to be John Smith isn’t a child abuser? I suspect the latter. Does Blair misapprehend the concern people have about carers and childminders?

It seems to me that here the identity card and National Register isn’t of much use at all - particularly with regard to criminal records, as these are prohibited from being held on the Register. Primary legislation will be required to change this.

If I understand correctly, if the employer wants to know whether or not the applicant has a criminal record, the employer will still need to apply for a CRB disclosure.

Identity doesn’t tell us much at all about intention.

Posted by TD on 2007-01-04 16:40:17.
Link. Report abuse to Back to the main document list

It won't just be your passport...

If you work with children, or volunteer, before too long you'll find that the state requires you not only to have to submit to a 'police check' but to submit to *lifelong* surveillance and cede control of your personal and private data (i.e. be Registered on the ID scheme).

The government will achieve this by 'designating' the CRB check certificate, as it intends to do for driving licenses and other official documents - to force moer and more people on to the National Identity Register (NIR).

Don't belive the hype. The NIR is still there - it'd just built from three 'dirty' old databases, rather than the one big 'clean' one that the government promised when it first introduced the scheme, and was steamrollering it through Parliament.

N.B. Does anyone else think we need a recount? This new plan and official statements about it drop a couple of the fundamental elements on which the scheme was originally 'sold', namely the new, clean database, and iris scans (which were the only plausible candidate for one-to-many checking at enrolment - though it looked like they wouldn't work out). Parliament and the public have been sold a ringer...

Posted by Phil Booth on 2007-01-06 06:22:40.
Link. Report abuse to Back to the main document list


(You must give a valid email address, but it will not be displayed to the public.)

We only allow the following html tags em strong blockquote p br. After posting, there may be a short delay before your comment appears on the site