E-borders Referred To In Chief Secretaries Service Delivery Plan 2008!

[Cronky]

Just sick of going over the same shit with you. It's clear you know nowt about this subject, and aren't prepared to learn, so what's the point?

 

The argument that we are safer if the government collects masses of personal data about everyone just does not stand the test of time.

 

I would certainly argue that the government can better control people with lots of information and that they do this by creating more bureaucracy.

 

Personally, I don't feel life is any more dangerous these days than, say, twenty years ago. There is certainly more fear around but I don't see the justification for it.

[ai_Droid]

The argument that we are safer if the government collects masses of personal data about everyone just does not stand the test of time.

I would certainly argue that the government can better control people with lots of information and that they do this by creating more bureaucracy.

Personally, I don't feel life is any more dangerous these days than, say, twenty years ago. There is certainly more fear around but I don't see the justification for it.

 

 

I really can't be arsed. You've never actually said what the downsides are, or shown any understanding on the detail. I'm not responding any more, you just hammer home the same points over and over without showing any knowledge of the specifics.

[Albert Tatlock]

After todays byelection it could all be academic anyhoo - 2:30am tomorrow A.M. could well see another nail in tax-the-arse-off-you Gordon Broon's coffin. The chickens have all now started to come home to roost.

 

If NuShite have any sense, which I now firmly doubt, they should drop these proposals like a hot brick.

Ouch!

 

They're worse than NuShite, but at least the tories are against ID and the databases behind them.

[Dodger]

The issue is that data can be stored safely for a time, the problem is with technology advancing all the time that the safeguards have to be continously upgraded to protect them.

 

Nail on the head. Existing systems like manual passport recording, various propriatory photography systems etc are out of date, so need to be upgraded. Well done for finally seeing the light.

 

The rest of your post is hilariously clueless. You know nothing about this subject. Go away and learn, then perhaps you can talk with some authority on this subject.

 

"Nail on the head. Existing systems like manual passport recording, various propriatory photography systems etc are out of date, so need to be upgraded. Well done for finally seeing the light." The problem is that the old servers and level of protection with electronically held data is that it becomes less secure over time, unless there is a team of programmers looking to improve the level of protection all the time and counter any worm, virus or trojan that may be made by a third party for whatever reason. My concern has always been the security of the data long term, how it is stored, used, collected and deleted beyond restoration. My other concern is the amount of data that they feel is necessary, as the reasons for collecting it will not stop those it is supposed to stop, criminals and illigal immigrants. How will they check leisure craft into and out of the IOM? In Peel we have yachts that have come over for the TT from Southampton for example, how will E Borders stop the ribs nipping from Peel to Scotland, Wales and Ireland?

 

The E borders strategy is flawed, the data collection is unnecessary and intrusive and it cannot be protected in the long term from loss. That's the nail on the head!

[Dodger]

No change on identity requirements for UK travel

 

Passports or other I.D. will not be required for travellers from the Isle of Man to enter the United Kingdom, Chief Minister Tony Brown MHK confirmed in the House of Keys yesterday (Tuesday March 31, 2009).

 

Mr Brown also reported that the routine collection of passenger data, under the e-Borders programme to monitor travel, would not apply to routes between the Island and the UK.

 

While there is no change planned in the information required by the authorities on these routes, the Chief Minister pointed out that carriers could still ask for proof of identity as at present.

 

He told MHKs

 

‘Extensive deliberations between the Isle of Man and the UK Governments on this important issue have been ongoing for some considerable time. I am now pleased to advise the House that after the latest discussions with the UK Government, agreement has successfully been reached that there will be no requirement for individuals from the Isle of Man to carry passports or any other identification in order to enter the United Kingdom, and this will also apply to travellers from the UK to our Island.

‘I would add however that carriers themselves will undoubtedly continue to require proof of identity from travellers, as they do at present.

‘I can also advise the House that the routine collection of passenger data under the e-Borders programme will now not apply to travel between the Isle of Man and the UK.’

The Chief Minister has also written to all Members of Tynwald explaining in more detail recent developments in relation to the Common Travel Area (CTA) and the e-Borders programme (letter copied below).

 

The CTA - which has allowed free movement between the UK, Irish Republic and Crown Dependencies – has been reviewed to provide for checks on travellers by air and sea between the UK and the Irish Republic. The UK Government says that changes to its CTA legislation will not mean the introduction of fixed border controls between the Isle of Man and the UK, so travellers on these routes will not require passports or other ID for immigration purposes.

 

The e-Borders programme will gather data from carriers on passengers entering the UK to monitor them for security and immigration purposes. It has now been agreed that the Isle of Man will be regarded as inside the UK’s e-Border, so data will only be collected on routes between the Island and the Irish Republic. "

 

Fantastic news, finally!

[Moghrey Mie]

Try turning up at Ronaldsway without any 'visual identification' ie your passport and see what happens.

[manshimajin]

The e-Borders programme will gather data from carriers on passengers entering the UK to monitor them for security and immigration purposes. It has now been agreed that the Isle of Man will be regarded as inside the UK’s e-Border, so data will only be collected on routes between the Island and the Irish Republic. "

 

Fantastic news, finally!

So I can use the borderless crossing between the Irish Republic and NI and any route from NI or IOM to the UK without having to prove identity. I've never been asked for it by IOMSPC or any other ferry company. Whilst this is excellent news it sounds like a hole in the rationale for removing the CTA. I am looking forward to telling the UK Border Protection Agency patrols in NW England that I have just travelled from inside the UK e-borders.

 

BTW I would assume that you either HAVE a border or you don't so why try to be trendy and call it an e.border?

[Slim]

BTW I would assume that you either HAVE a border or you don't so why try to be trendy and call it an e.border?

 

Because it gets the tin hatters all excited.

[ballaughbiker]

carriers could still ask for proof of identity as at present

As can the port police 'other side. They can detain you if you haven't got any.

[Albert Tatlock]

BTW I would assume that you either HAVE a border or you don't so why try to be trendy and call it an e.border?

 

Because it gets the tin hatters all excited.

We prefer to be called liberal democratic thanks...you know, those people that don't want to live in the Orwellian state-controlled freak-show that so many people seem to have allowed to develop (and continue to allow to develop) and call the UK these days. We are those people that realise and value that millions of our ancestors fought and died trying to keep that kind of crap out of our lives - and don't buy the unrealistic probabilities sold daily in order to build the NuShite police state under the guise of security.

[Slim]

We prefer to be called liberal democratic thanks...you know, those people that don't want to live in the Orwellian state-controlled freak-show that so many people seem to have allowed to develop (and continue to allow to develop) and call the UK these days. We are those people that realise and value that millions of our ancestors fought and died trying to keep that kind of crap out of our lives - and don't buy the unrealistic probabilities sold daily in order to build the NuShite police state under the guise of security.

 

I think you missed my point. I meant that data collection and privacy violation doesn't suddenly get worse because there's an 'e' in front of it. What depresses me is nob ends like Cronky who get all excited when technology is involved, it's just not automatically worse to process this kind of thing digitally, it's often a way to better protect privacy.

 

I think the excitement over 'e' detracts from the real issues.

[ans]

Then there's the rest of us, who prefer to be known as 'normal'

[Albert Tatlock]

We prefer to be called liberal democratic thanks...you know, those people that don't want to live in the Orwellian state-controlled freak-show that so many people seem to have allowed to develop (and continue to allow to develop) and call the UK these days. We are those people that realise and value that millions of our ancestors fought and died trying to keep that kind of crap out of our lives - and don't buy the unrealistic probabilities sold daily in order to build the NuShite police state under the guise of security.

 

I think you missed my point. I meant that data collection and privacy violation doesn't suddenly get worse because there's an 'e' in front of it. What depresses me is nob ends like Cronky who get all excited when technology is involved, it's just not automatically worse to process this kind of thing digitally, it's often a way to better protect privacy.

 

I think the excitement over 'e' detracts from the real issues.

I didn't miss the point - the 'e' bit opens up a raft of issues under data: accountability, security, access, the basis for holding the data (state v citizen, citizen v state etc.) - e.g. allows the ease for unecessary spread, potential misuse and loss of the data, 'assumed guilty and having to prove yourself innocent first' issues, incorrect data or some version of 'the picture' built from it be wrong, and changes the relationship between the state and the individual etc. etc.

 

...and Ans...it may be 'normal' and hence acceptable to you, but for those that understand the values that a liberal democracy is built on, it is not normal nor acceptable. People who accept this crap are ruled by fear, guided by unprobable events and ragtops - and used to be those people seen knitting at executions or carrying a pitchfork and flaming torch somewhere at the back of a noisy crowd.

[ans]

Do you have a checklist of buzzwords and catchphrases you tick off when you post? The dramatic language you employ works against you as you just come across as simply another paranoid conspiracy nut.

[Slim]

I didn't miss the point - the 'e' bit opens up a raft of issues under data: accountability, security, access, the basis for holding the data (state v citizen, citizen v state etc.) - e.g. allows the ease for unecessary spread, potential misuse and loss of the data, 'assumed guilty and having to prove yourself innocent first' issues, incorrect data or some version of 'the picture' built from it be wrong, and changes the relationship between the state and the individual etc. etc.

 

No, all those issues existed before you added the 'e', and were mostly harder to audit, harder to control access and much less useful so therefore harder to justify.