ID scheme, IT the key to Blunkett's new terror laws

[R.A. Hettinga]

<http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/11/24/security_bill_roundup/print.html>

The Register


 Biting the hand that feeds IT

The Register ; Internet and Law ; Digital Rights/Digital Wrongs ;

 Original URL: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/11/24/security_bill_roundup/

ID scheme, IT the key to Blunkett's new terror laws
By John Lettice (john.lettice at theregister.co.uk)
Published Wednesday 24th November 2004 12:00 GMT

The pile of security legislation the Government unveiled yesterday is
disturbingly large but, as Peter Hain has to all intents and purposes
confessed, most of it is window-dressing this side of the election. A
couple of Bills will get through before May, with ID cards and SOCA, the
'British FBI', among the most likely to do so. Another with heavy IT
implications, the Management of Offenders Bill (tagging) also stands some
chance, but ID Cards (the Government seems to have switched back to "Cards"
rather than "Scheme") looks like being the showpiece the Government will
try to sell itself on in the next election campaign.

The 'British FBI', the Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA) will not cover
terrorism, which makes it not much of an FBI, but will have a lot to do
with surveillance, and is headed by former MI5 chief Sir Stephen Lander,
who revealed himself as worryingly gung-ho in Sunday's Dimbleby programme.
It was the excited smirk he gave as he said: "I'm an enthusiast for using
wiretaps" that got us. So lots more lovely wiretaps in the Serious
Organised Crime and Police Bill, some media training for Sir Stephen, but
quite possibly no sign of wiretaps being used in court before the Counter
Terrorism Bill makes them more secrecy-friendly on the other side of the
election. Lander, along with Blunkett and most of the security services,
isn't so keen on having surveillance operations being exposed in court
proceedings. On the two flagship bills Blunkett says:


"Identity cards would help us tackle the organised criminals and terrorists
who use fake identities to carry out their crimes. They would also aid the
fight against illegal working and immigration abuse, enable easier and more
convenient access to services and ensure free public services are only used
by those entitled to them. The Identity Cards Bill will set out the
stringent safeguards we want for the use of the cards, what information
they contain and who can access it.

"The Serious Organised Crime and Police Bill would establish a new agency
to lead the fight against crime gangs whose trade in drugs and guns has an
impact in every community in Britain. A new law-enforcement agency will be
created that will pursue crime bosses using the very latest technology. The
Bill would also overhaul the powers of police officers and extend the
powers of Community Support Officers so they can deal effectively with
anti-social behaviour on the streets."

We'll leave the mission-creep obvious in that last sentence until we can do
a broader reading of the legislation for 'shopping list' type additions.
Both the surveillance aspect and the intent to use the "very latest
technology" (which underlies most of the security plans) is of major
importance for the IT industry.

Two draft bills, the Draft Youth Justice Bill and the Draft
Counter-Terrorism Bill, are there to put down marks for the next
administration and to 'crowd out' the opposition on the security issue. The
Youth Justice Bill will be ramping up the use of tagging and tracking to
support a move away from prison and towards community sentences, while the
Counter-Terrorism Bill will likely include Blunkett's 'ASBOS for terror
suspects' (or as we're trying to call them, Anti-Internet Behaviour Orders,
AIBOs, (http://www.theregister.co.uk/2004/11/21/blunkett_internet_ban/) and
juryless anti-terror courts. This does not seem sufficient to populate a
whole David Blunkett 'sensible preemptive security measure', and we feel
sure there will be much more.

A couple more measures do not have any obvious security implications, but
are likely to be of interest to Register readers. The Inland Revenue and
Customs Merger Bill is intended to do what it says on the tin, and will
clearly have an impact on your personal financial situation. The Road
Safety Bill will allow police to force drink-drive offenders to take
another test, and raises the fine for driving while using a mobile phone to
#60. This latter is a response to the lack of impact of the previous effort
at a ban, which itself was brought in because enforcement of existing
legislation on driving without due care and attention was patchy. You'll
note that the problem here is enforcement rather than level of fine, but
that they're pretending not to notice.

The Clean Neighbourhoods And Environment Bill might have an impact on the
more rowdy elements of the IT business, not that this should apply to
Register readers. It gives local authorities the power to issue fines for a
range of messy behaviour, including litter, noise and light pollution
(light pollution? No doubt somebody will explain), so getting spot-fined
for dropping cigarettes and being unruly outside pubs will become more
common. Blunkett's 'zero tolerance' consultant from the US has also been
suggesting points on your driving licence for anti-social behaviour, so
there will be that to consider in the future as well.

Oh, and Blunkett proposes to broaden police powers of arrest, while the
Drugs Bill allows police to test for drugs on arrest rather than when
charged. Those arrested will already have their DNA added to the national
database, and ultimately the wider arrest powers will allow biometrics to
be added in the same way (if they haven't got them already by then). It all
joins up, conceptually. Joining it up IT-wise will be a lot harder, and
that issue will keep us all busy for quite a few years yet. .


-- 
-----------------
R. A. Hettinga <mailto: rah at ibuc.com>
The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation <http://www.ibuc.com/>
44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA
"... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity,
[predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to
experience." -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'