| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 27 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 41:10:26 |
| Calls: | 631 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 1,187 |
| D/L today: |
24 files (29,813K bytes) |
| Messages: | 174,724 |
The soft sell has started.
ItrCOll be stored on your phone. Will the government supply a phone?
Suppose
you donrCOt want a government app on your phone, what will the sanction be?
You wonrCOt need to carry it with you, itrCOs only to check for your right >to
work. Many people donrCOt work, so whatrCOs in this for them?
It seems like the greater part of sixty-nine million people will be put to >some inconvenience in order to deal with illegal working. But the clue is
in the reason, there are already laws on the issue, which we all recognise >can be and are ignored in certain quarters, so why will this sledgehammer >work any better?
The government is impressed with the system in Estonia, which would appear
to include fingerprints and retina scans, and is rather more far-reaching >than a simple proof of rCyright to workrCO.
ItrCOs going to be interesting to see how this runs, unfortunately.
The soft sell has started.
ItrCOll be stored on your phone. Will the government supply a phone? Suppose you donrCOt want a government app on your phone, what will the sanction be?
You wonrCOt need to carry it with you, itrCOs only to check for your right to work. Many people donrCOt work, so whatrCOs in this for them?
It seems like the greater part of sixty-nine million people will be put to some inconvenience in order to deal with illegal working. But the clue is
in the reason, there are already laws on the issue, which we all recognise can be and are ignored in certain quarters, so why will this sledgehammer work any better?
The government is impressed with the system in Estonia, which would appear
to include fingerprints and retina scans, and is rather more far-reaching than a simple proof of rCyright to workrCO.
ItrCOs going to be interesting to see how this runs, unfortunately.
The soft sell has started.
ItrCOll be stored on your phone. Will the government supply a phone?
Suppose
you donrCOt want a government app on your phone, what will the sanction be?
You wonrCOt need to carry it with you, itrCOs only to check for your right >to
work. Many people donrCOt work, so whatrCOs in this for them?
It seems like the greater part of sixty-nine million people will be put to >some inconvenience in order to deal with illegal working. But the clue is
in the reason, there are already laws on the issue, which we all recognise >can be and are ignored in certain quarters, so why will this sledgehammer >work any better?
The government is impressed with the system in Estonia, which would appear
to include fingerprints and retina scans, and is rather more far-reaching >than a simple proof of rCyright to workrCO.
ItrCOs going to be interesting to see how this runs, unfortunately.
The soft sell has started.
ItrCOll be stored on your phone. Will the government supply a phone? Suppose you donrCOt want a government app on your phone, what will the sanction be?
You wonrCOt need to carry it with you, itrCOs only to check for your right to work. Many people donrCOt work, so whatrCOs in this for them?
It seems like the greater part of sixty-nine million people will be put to some inconvenience in order to deal with illegal working. But the clue is
in the reason, there are already laws on the issue, which we all recognise can be and are ignored in certain quarters, so why will this sledgehammer work any better?
The government is impressed with the system in Estonia, which would appear
to include fingerprints and retina scans, and is rather more far-reaching than a simple proof of rCyright to workrCO.
ItrCOs going to be interesting to see how this runs, unfortunately.
On 26/09/2025 09:08, Spike wrote:
[quoted text muted]
Unclear at present but you won't be able to work without one and you
probably won't be able to open a bank account either.
The IT people need to start thinking about a secure database now I imagine.
The soft sell has started.
ItrCOll be stored on your phone. Will the government supply a phone? Suppose >you donrCOt want a government app on your phone, what will the sanction be?
You wonrCOt need to carry it with you, itrCOs only to check for your right to >work. Many people donrCOt work, so whatrCOs in this for them?
It seems like the greater part of sixty-nine million people will be put to >some inconvenience in order to deal with illegal working. But the clue is
in the reason, there are already laws on the issue, which we all recognise >can be and are ignored in certain quarters, so why will this sledgehammer >work any better?
The government is impressed with the system in Estonia, which would appear
to include fingerprints and retina scans, and is rather more far-reaching >than a simple proof of rCyright to workrCO.
ItrCOs going to be interesting to see how this runs, unfortunately.
The black economy is estimated to be around 10% of GDP (-u200 billion)
and this would surely continue ID cards or not.
The soft sell has started.
ItrCOll be stored on your phone. Will the government supply a phone?
On 26 Sep 2025 08:08:49 GMT, Spike <aero.spike@mail.com> wrote:
The soft sell has started.
It|ore4raoll be stored on your phone. Will the government supply a phone? Suppose
you don|ore4raot want a government app on your phone, what will the sanction be?
You won|ore4raot need to carry it with you, it|ore4raos only to check for your right to
work. Many people don|ore4raot work, so what|ore4raos in this for them?
It seems like the greater part of sixty-nine million people will be put to >> some inconvenience in order to deal with illegal working. But the clue is
in the reason, there are already laws on the issue, which we all recognise >> can be and are ignored in certain quarters, so why will this sledgehammer
work any better?
The government is impressed with the system in Estonia, which would appear >> to include fingerprints and retina scans, and is rather more far-reaching
than a simple proof of |ore4-Lright to work|ore4rao.
It|ore4raos going to be interesting to see how this runs, unfortunately.
What am I missing here? To work legally one has to have an NI Number
as far as I thought I knew. The employer/employee then accounts for
Tax and National Insurance.
The black economy is estimated to be around 10% of GDP (-u200 billion)
and this would surely continue ID cards or not.
Something is not adding up here, maybe Rachel in accounts is doing the
maths.
The soft sell has started.
ItrCOll be stored on your phone. Will the government supply a phone? Suppose you donrCOt want a government app on your phone, what will the sanction be?
You wonrCOt need to carry it with you, itrCOs only to check for your right to work. Many people donrCOt work, so whatrCOs in this for them?
It seems like the greater part of sixty-nine million people will be put to some inconvenience in order to deal with illegal working.
But the clue is
in the reason, there are already laws on the issue, which we all recognise can be and are ignored in certain quarters, so why will this sledgehammer work any better?
The government is impressed with the system in Estonia, which would appear
to include fingerprints and retina scans, and is rather more far-reaching than a simple proof of rCyright to workrCO.
ItrCOs going to be interesting to see how this runs, unfortunately.
Japanese proof of ID has your fingerprint on it (by now it may have additional biometrics). They use invisible ink to take the print but
that is the only concession. US citizens were very upset about it.
Spike <aero.spike@mail.com> wrote:
The soft sell has started.
ItrCOll be stored on your phone. Will the government supply a phone? Suppose >> you donrCOt want a government app on your phone, what will the sanction be? >> You wonrCOt need to carry it with you, itrCOs only to check for your right to
work. Many people donrCOt work, so whatrCOs in this for them?
It seems like the greater part of sixty-nine million people will be put to >> some inconvenience in order to deal with illegal working. But the clue is
in the reason, there are already laws on the issue, which we all recognise >> can be and are ignored in certain quarters, so why will this sledgehammer
work any better?
The government is impressed with the system in Estonia, which would appear >> to include fingerprints and retina scans, and is rather more far-reaching
than a simple proof of rCyright to workrCO.
ItrCOs going to be interesting to see how this runs, unfortunately.
What am I missing here? To work legally one has to have an NI Number
as far as I thought I knew. The employer/employee then accounts for
Tax and National Insurance.
The black economy is estimated to be around 10% of GDP (u200 billion)
and this would surely continue ID cards or not.
Something is not adding up here, maybe Rachel in accounts is doing the
maths.
On 26 Sep 2025 08:08:49 GMT, Spike <aero.spike@mail.com> wrote:
The soft sell has started.
It|ore4raoll be stored on your phone. Will the government supply a phone? Suppose
you don|ore4raot want a government app on your phone, what will the sanction be?
You won|ore4raot need to carry it with you, it|ore4raos only to check for your right to
work. Many people don|ore4raot work, so what|ore4raos in this for them?
It seems like the greater part of sixty-nine million people will be put to >> some inconvenience in order to deal with illegal working. But the clue is
in the reason, there are already laws on the issue, which we all recognise >> can be and are ignored in certain quarters, so why will this sledgehammer
work any better?
The government is impressed with the system in Estonia, which would appear >> to include fingerprints and retina scans, and is rather more far-reaching
than a simple proof of |ore4-Lright to work|ore4rao.
It|ore4raos going to be interesting to see how this runs, unfortunately.
What am I missing here? To work legally one has to have an NI Number
as far as I thought I knew. The employer/employee then accounts for
Tax and National Insurance.
The black economy is estimated to be around 10% of GDP (-u200 billion)
and this would surely continue ID cards or not.
Something is not adding up here, maybe Rachel in accounts is doing the
maths.
On 26/09/2025 09:08, Spike wrote:
The soft sell has started.
ItAll be stored on your phone. Will the government supply a phone? Suppose >> you donAt want a government app on your phone, what will the sanction be?
Unclear at present but you won't be able to work without one and you >probably won't be able to open a bank account either. I expect the banks >will demand to see the ID periodically or close your account as a part
of their draconian anti money laundering procedures.
Questions of how the system will work for people without suitable
phones,
or simply don't want the app on their phones, have yet to be answered.
Am 26.09.25 um 09:08 schrieb Spike:
The soft sell has started.
ItrCOll be stored on your phone. Will the government supply a phone?
Do we know what kind of phone it has to be? Surely Android, but does it require NFC? Can you sideload the app? I have disabled all Google
spyware on my phone.
I will soon have to upgrade my phone because Italy is also going
"digital" and my new Italian ID card will have to have an NFC enabled
phone to load my credentials.
I am a foreigner. My immigration status has already gone digital. Having
a digital way to prove my entitlement to stay and work works in my
interest. So far it has sucked big time. How many times I have heard "Where's the stamp on your passport?"
If there was a way not to upgrade my phone, I'd be 100% ok with a
digital move, but it would piss me off if my phone had to run Google
spyware all the time.
Pelnty of indigenous British people work at least partly in what is
known as the "black economy".
I was surprised when Cameron scrapped the plans in 2010.
On 9/26/25 13:17, AnthonyL wrote:
On 26 Sep 2025 08:08:49 GMT, Spike <aero.spike@mail.com> wrote:
The soft sell has started.
It|ore4raoll be stored on your phone. Will the government supply a phone? >>> Suppose
you don|ore4raot want a government app on your phone, what will the
sanction be?
You won|ore4raot need to carry it with you, it|ore4raos only to check for your
right to
work. Many people don|ore4raot work, so what|ore4raos in this for them?
It seems like the greater part of sixty-nine million people will be
put to
some inconvenience in order to deal with illegal working. But the
clue is
in the reason,-a there are already laws on the issue, which we all
recognise
can be and are ignored in certain quarters, so why will this
sledgehammer
work any better?
The government is impressed with the system in Estonia, which would
appear
to include fingerprints and retina scans, and is rather more
far-reaching
than a simple proof of |ore4-Lright to work|ore4rao.
It|ore4raos going to be interesting to see how this runs, unfortunately. >>>
What am I missing here?-a To work legally one has to have an NI Number
as far as I thought I knew.-a The employer/employee then accounts for
Tax and National Insurance.
The black economy is estimated to be around 10% of GDP (-u200 billion)
and this would surely continue ID cards or not.
Something is not adding up here, maybe Rachel in accounts is doing the
maths.
There are probably many reasons the NI number isn't ideal. Presumably, assignment of NI numbers historically wasn't reliable, so there are now
many duplicates/fakes.
For those of us with a history in IT, we know that managers backed with access to deep funding like to start new projects, rather than improve existing infrastructure. No one would remember Keir as the PM who
improved NI numbers.
The media seems to be discussing nice to have characteristics of the ID, some of which sound similar to a-a Certificate Authority enabling Public/Private key infrastructure.
It has always seemed reasonable to me to have a publicly run Certificate Authority, like roads, hospitals etc.
I can see many private uses which could benefit from access to a
nationwide public key infrastructure, everyone has a key. Much like we benefit from roads, railways, sewage, etc.
We could also benefit from public secure electronic mail, public
signatures. None of the old print out, sign and post, etc.
For those of us with a history in IT, we know that managers backed with access to deep funding like to start new projects, rather than improve existing infrastructure. No one would remember Keir as the PM who improved NI numbers.
The ID "document" (however issued, stored and produced when necessary) will be evidence of the right to be in the UK, the right to work as an employee, the right (as I understand it) to rent residential accommodation) and the eligibility to claim and receive certain social security benefits
(including those administered by HMRC). It could also clarify whether the holder has the right to drive.
Well we could also "benefit" from the side effects, just like the DVLA
We could also benefit from public secure electronic mail, public
signatures. None of the old print out, sign and post, etc.
is able to sell our details to any old parking scammer & his uncle...
On Fri, 26 Sep 2025 17:46:07 +0100, Mark Goodge wrote:
Questions of how the system will work for people without suitable
phones,
or simply don't want the app on their phones, have yet to be answered.
It will be a QR code you can have tattooed on your forehead.
On 26/09/2025 14:17, JNugent wrote:
The ID "document" (however issued, stored and produced when necessary)
will be evidence of the right to be in the UK, the right to work as an
employee, the right (as I understand it) to rent residential
accommodation) and the eligibility to claim and receive certain social
security benefits (including those administered by HMRC). It could
also clarify whether the holder has the right to drive.
Right to work, rent,
DBS
https://enablingdigitalidentity.blog.gov.uk/2024/10/24/what-you-can-use-a-digital-identity-for-today/
On 26/09/2025 15:08, Pancho wrote:
I can see many private uses which could benefit from access to aWell we could also "benefit" from the side effects, just like the DVLA
nationwide public key infrastructure, everyone has a key. Much like we
benefit from roads, railways, sewage, etc.
We could also benefit from public secure electronic mail, public
signatures. None of the old print out, sign and post, etc.
is able to sell our details to any old parking scammer & his uncle...
On 26/09/2025 17:50, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Fri, 26 Sep 2025 17:46:07 +0100, Mark Goodge wrote:
Questions of how the system will work for people without suitable
phones,
or simply don't want the app on their phones, have yet to be answered.
It will be a QR code you can have tattooed on your forehead.
Nah, Having a number on your arm as a means of identification is far
better.
I'm sure the Israeli government would recommend the inhabitants of Gaza be >tattooed with some ID too.
On 26/09/2025 17:28, Les. Hayward wrote:
On 26/09/2025 15:08, Pancho wrote:
I can see many private uses which could benefit from access to aWell we could also "benefit" from the side effects, just like the DVLA
nationwide public key infrastructure, everyone has a key. Much like
we benefit from roads, railways, sewage, etc.
We could also benefit from public secure electronic mail, public
signatures. None of the old print out, sign and post, etc.
is able to sell our details to any old parking scammer & his uncle...
Actually the DVLA driving license database system is almost up to the
job as national photo ID and central reference agency. Generalise it so
that all adults 16+ get a "driving license" but with no vehicles
permitted unless they have passed an appropriate test. Job done - very
little adjustment is required (but mission creep will surely follow).
The way you can digitally prove you exact current driving license points status with a one time code when hiring a vehicle is quite impressive.
On 26/09/2025 17:28, Les. Hayward wrote:
On 26/09/2025 15:08, Pancho wrote:
I can see many private uses which could benefit from access to aWell we could also "benefit" from the side effects, just like the DVLA
nationwide public key infrastructure, everyone has a key. Much like we
benefit from roads, railways, sewage, etc.
We could also benefit from public secure electronic mail, public
signatures. None of the old print out, sign and post, etc.
is able to sell our details to any old parking scammer & his uncle...
Actually the DVLA driving license database system is almost up to the
job as national photo ID and central reference agency. Generalise it so
that all adults 16+ get a "driving license" but with no vehicles
permitted unless they have passed an appropriate test. Job done - very little adjustment is required (but mission creep will surely follow).
The way you can digitally prove you exact current driving license points status with a one time code when hiring a vehicle is quite impressive.
On 26/09/2025 10:24 PM, Nick Finnigan wrote:
On 26/09/2025 14:17, JNugent wrote:
The ID "document" (however issued, stored and produced when necessary)
will be evidence of the right to be in the UK, the right to work as an
employee, the right (as I understand it) to rent residential
accommodation) and the eligibility to claim and receive certain social
security benefits (including those administered by HMRC). It could
also clarify whether the holder has the right to drive.
-a Right to work, rent,
I think *I* mentioned those!
DBS
For certain types of ocupation, perhaps that might be an idea.
https://enablingdigitalidentity.blog.gov.uk/2024/10/24/what-you-can-
use-a-digital-identity-for-today/
On 26/09/2025 17:28, Les. Hayward wrote:
[quoted text muted]
[quoted text muted]
Actually the DVLA driving license database system is almost up to the
job as national photo ID and central reference agency.
On 27/09/2025 11:49, JNugent wrote:
On 26/09/2025 10:24 PM, Nick Finnigan wrote:
On 26/09/2025 14:17, JNugent wrote:
The ID "document" (however issued, stored and produced when necessary) >>>> will be evidence of the right to be in the UK, the right to work as an >>>> employee, the right (as I understand it) to rent residential
accommodation) and the eligibility to claim and receive certain social >>>> security benefits (including those administered by HMRC). It could
also clarify whether the holder has the right to drive.
Right to work, rent,
I think *I* mentioned those!
DBS
For certain types of ocupation, perhaps that might be an idea.
https://enablingdigitalidentity.blog.gov.uk/2024/10/24/what-you-can-
use-a-digital-identity-for-today/
If it's really easy to determine someone's DBS status, more and more employers will want it to be required as it shows how important their
work is. Then landlords will want it...
On 26/09/2025 17:28, Les. Hayward wrote:
On 26/09/2025 15:08, Pancho wrote:
I can see many private uses which could benefit from access to aWell we could also "benefit" from the side effects, just like the DVLA
nationwide public key infrastructure, everyone has a key. Much like
we benefit from roads, railways, sewage, etc.
We could also benefit from public secure electronic mail, public
signatures. None of the old print out, sign and post, etc.
is able to sell our details to any old parking scammer & his uncle...
Actually the DVLA driving license database system is almost up to the
job as national photo ID and central reference agency. Generalise it so
that all adults 16+ get a "driving license" but with no vehicles
permitted unless they have passed an appropriate test. Job done - very little adjustment is required (but mission creep will surely follow).
The way you can digitally prove you exact current driving license points status with a one time code when hiring a vehicle is quite impressive.
On 2025-09-27, Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
On 26/09/2025 17:28, Les. Hayward wrote:
On 26/09/2025 15:08, Pancho wrote:
I can see many private uses which could benefit from access to aWell we could also "benefit" from the side effects, just like the DVLA
nationwide public key infrastructure, everyone has a key. Much like
we benefit from roads, railways, sewage, etc.
We could also benefit from public secure electronic mail, public
signatures. None of the old print out, sign and post, etc.
is able to sell our details to any old parking scammer & his uncle...
Actually the DVLA driving license database system is almost up to the
job as national photo ID and central reference agency. Generalise it so
that all adults 16+ get a "driving license" but with no vehicles
permitted unless they have passed an appropriate test. Job done - very
little adjustment is required (but mission creep will surely follow).
Yes, I've suggested this before - allow the issuing of driving licences
with no vehicle categories listed, for people too young to drive or
people who cannot drive for medical reasons. Problem solved: cheap, convenient, universally-recognised government-issued photographic ID for everyone.
On 27 Sep 2025 at 15:40:54 BST, "Max Demian" <max_demian@bigfoot.com>
wrote:
On 27/09/2025 11:49, JNugent wrote:
On 26/09/2025 10:24 PM, Nick Finnigan wrote:
On 26/09/2025 14:17, JNugent wrote:
The ID "document" (however issued, stored and produced when
necessary)
will be evidence of the right to be in the UK, the right to work as
an employee, the right (as I understand it) to rent residential
accommodation) and the eligibility to claim and receive certain
social security benefits (including those administered by HMRC). It
could also clarify whether the holder has the right to drive.
Right to work, rent,
I think *I* mentioned those!
DBS
For certain types of ocupation, perhaps that might be an idea.
https://enablingdigitalidentity.blog.gov.uk/2024/10/24/what-you-can-
use-a-digital-identity-for-today/
If it's really easy to determine someone's DBS status, more and more
employers will want it to be required as it shows how important their
work is. Then landlords will want it...
Currently it is unlawful for anyone to require a DBS unless they are specifically authorised to do so. Unfortunately this is not a law that
is enforced.
On 27/09/2025 12:27, Martin Brown wrote:
On 26/09/2025 17:28, Les. Hayward wrote:
On 26/09/2025 15:08, Pancho wrote:
I can see many private uses which could benefit from access to aWell we could also "benefit" from the side effects, just like the
nationwide public key infrastructure, everyone has a key. Much like
we benefit from roads, railways, sewage, etc.
We could also benefit from public secure electronic mail, public
signatures. None of the old print out, sign and post, etc.
DVLA is able to sell our details to any old parking scammer & his
uncle...
Actually the DVLA driving license database system is almost up to the
job as national photo ID and central reference agency. Generalise it
so that all adults 16+ get a "driving license" but with no vehicles
permitted unless they have passed an appropriate test. Job done - very
little adjustment is required (but mission creep will surely follow).
The way you can digitally prove you exact current driving license
points status with a one time code when hiring a vehicle is quite
impressive.
Then the "one time code" could be extended to release information on
whether you have been recorded for "non crime hate incidents" and the rest.
On the way to a Chinese style "social credit" system.
Blair's original ID scheme would have allowed a wide array of petty officials to see all our details, with little to stop those from
gossiping about them.
On 2025-09-27, Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
On 26/09/2025 17:28, Les. Hayward wrote:
On 26/09/2025 15:08, Pancho wrote:
I can see many private uses which could benefit from access to aWell we could also "benefit" from the side effects, just like the DVLA
nationwide public key infrastructure, everyone has a key. Much like we >>>> benefit from roads, railways, sewage, etc.
We could also benefit from public secure electronic mail, public
signatures. None of the old print out, sign and post, etc.
is able to sell our details to any old parking scammer & his uncle...
Actually the DVLA driving license database system is almost up to the
job as national photo ID and central reference agency. Generalise it so
that all adults 16+ get a "driving license" but with no vehicles
permitted unless they have passed an appropriate test. Job done - very
little adjustment is required (but mission creep will surely follow).
Yes, I've suggested this before - allow the issuing of driving licences
with no vehicle categories listed, for people too young to drive or
people who cannot drive for medical reasons. Problem solved: cheap, convenient, universally-recognised government-issued photographic ID
for everyone.
On 27/09/2025 15:36, Max Demian wrote:
On 27/09/2025 12:27, Martin Brown wrote:
On 26/09/2025 17:28, Les. Hayward wrote:
On 26/09/2025 15:08, Pancho wrote:
I can see many private uses which could benefit from access to aWell we could also "benefit" from the side effects, just like the
nationwide public key infrastructure, everyone has a key. Much like >>>>> we benefit from roads, railways, sewage, etc.
We could also benefit from public secure electronic mail, public
signatures. None of the old print out, sign and post, etc.
DVLA is able to sell our details to any old parking scammer & his
uncle...
Actually the DVLA driving license database system is almost up to the
job as national photo ID and central reference agency. Generalise it
so that all adults 16+ get a "driving license" but with no vehicles
permitted unless they have passed an appropriate test. Job done -
very little adjustment is required (but mission creep will surely
follow).
The way you can digitally prove you exact current driving license
points status with a one time code when hiring a vehicle is quite
impressive.
Then the "one time code" could be extended to release information on
whether you have been recorded for "non crime hate incidents" and the
rest.
On the way to a Chinese style "social credit" system.
Blair's original ID scheme would have allowed a wide array of petty
officials to see all our details, with little to stop those from
gossiping about them.
Are you really that paranoid?
Martin Brown wrote:
The way you can digitally prove you exact current driving license points >>status with a one time code when hiring a vehicle is quite impressive.
But nobody seems to want to use the codes ... "You can just bring your >licence in"
On 27/09/2025 15:36, Max Demian wrote:
On 27/09/2025 12:27, Martin Brown wrote:
On 26/09/2025 17:28, Les. Hayward wrote:
On 26/09/2025 15:08, Pancho wrote:
I can see many private uses which could benefit from access to aWell we could also "benefit" from the side effects, just like the
nationwide public key infrastructure, everyone has a key. Much like
we benefit from roads, railways, sewage, etc.
We could also benefit from public secure electronic mail, public
signatures. None of the old print out, sign and post, etc.
DVLA is able to sell our details to any old parking scammer & his
uncle...
Actually the DVLA driving license database system is almost up to the
job as national photo ID and central reference agency. Generalise it
so that all adults 16+ get a "driving license" but with no vehicles
permitted unless they have passed an appropriate test. Job done - very
little adjustment is required (but mission creep will surely follow).
The way you can digitally prove you exact current driving license
points status with a one time code when hiring a vehicle is quite
impressive.
Then the "one time code" could be extended to release information on
whether you have been recorded for "non crime hate incidents" and the rest. >>
On the way to a Chinese style "social credit" system.
Blair's original ID scheme would have allowed a wide array of petty
officials to see all our details, with little to stop those from
gossiping about them.
Are you really that paranoid?
On 27/09/2025 14:40, Jon Ribbens wrote:
On 2025-09-27, Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:I can hear the groaning from Swansea when they are required to double
On 26/09/2025 17:28, Les. Hayward wrote:
On 26/09/2025 15:08, Pancho wrote:
I can see many private uses which could benefit from access to aWell we could also "benefit" from the side effects, just like the DVLA >>>> is able to sell our details to any old parking scammer & his uncle...
nationwide public key infrastructure, everyone has a key. Much like we >>>>> benefit from roads, railways, sewage, etc.
We could also benefit from public secure electronic mail, public
signatures. None of the old print out, sign and post, etc.
Actually the DVLA driving license database system is almost up to the
job as national photo ID and central reference agency. Generalise it so
that all adults 16+ get a "driving license" but with no vehicles
permitted unless they have passed an appropriate test. Job done - very
little adjustment is required (but mission creep will surely follow).
Yes, I've suggested this before - allow the issuing of driving licences
with no vehicle categories listed, for people too young to drive or
people who cannot drive for medical reasons. Problem solved: cheap,
convenient, universally-recognised government-issued photographic ID
for everyone.
the number of licences they have to issue-a - without any additional resources no doubt.
(I have no idea what proportion of the total population already have a licence.)
On 27/09/2025 14:40, Jon Ribbens wrote:
On 2025-09-27, Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
I can hear the groaning from Swansea when they are required to doubleActually the DVLA driving license database system is almost up to the
job as national photo ID and central reference agency. Generalise it so
that all adults 16+ get a "driving license" but with no vehicles
permitted unless they have passed an appropriate test. Job done - very
little adjustment is required (but mission creep will surely follow).
Yes, I've suggested this before - allow the issuing of driving licences
with no vehicle categories listed, for people too young to drive or
people who cannot drive for medical reasons. Problem solved: cheap,
convenient, universally-recognised government-issued photographic ID
for everyone.
the number of licences they have to issue - without any additional >resources no doubt.
(I have no idea what proportion of the total population already have a >licence.)
O
As of the most recent figures issued by DVLA, there are 42,719,184 full licences and 10,438,276 provisional licences currently active, making a
total of 53,157,460 licences.
The total population of the UK is somewhere in the vicinity of 68,300,000.
So around 78% of the population already has a licence. That's more than the adult (18+) population of the UK, which is around 52,000,000, or 76% of the total population. Although that's partly explained by the fact that you can get a provisional licence as young as 15 (for certain types of vehicle), and also by the fact that DVLA are not necessarily notified when a licence
holder dies or emigrates, so there are licences issued that are not held by currently living UK residents.
What that does mean in practice, though, is that it would not be a significant additional burden on DVLA to issue a provisional licence to
every UK resident who does not already have a licence of some form. It certainly wouldn't be doubling their workload.
Mark
As of the most recent figures issued by DVLA, there are 42,719,184 full licences and 10,438,276 provisional licences currently active, making a
total of 53,157,460 licences.
[...]>What that does mean in practice, though, is that it would not be a significant additional burden on DVLA to issue a provisional licence to
every UK resident who does not already have a licence of some form. It certainly wouldn't be doubling their workload.
On Sat, 27 Sep 2025 19:56:56 +0100, Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:
On 27/09/2025 14:40, Jon Ribbens wrote:
On 2025-09-27, Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
I can hear the groaning from Swansea when they are required to doubleActually the DVLA driving license database system is almost up to the
job as national photo ID and central reference agency. Generalise it so >>>> that all adults 16+ get a "driving license" but with no vehicles
permitted unless they have passed an appropriate test. Job done - very >>>> little adjustment is required (but mission creep will surely follow).
Yes, I've suggested this before - allow the issuing of driving licences
with no vehicle categories listed, for people too young to drive or
people who cannot drive for medical reasons. Problem solved: cheap,
convenient, universally-recognised government-issued photographic ID
for everyone.
the number of licences they have to issue - without any additional >>resources no doubt.
(I have no idea what proportion of the total population already have a >>licence.)
As of the most recent figures issued by DVLA, there are 42,719,184 full licences and 10,438,276 provisional licences currently active, making a
total of 53,157,460 licences.
The total population of the UK is somewhere in the vicinity of 68,300,000.
So around 78% of the population already has a licence. That's more than the adult (18+) population of the UK, which is around 52,000,000, or 76% of the total population. Although that's partly explained by the fact that you can get a provisional licence as young as 15 (for certain types of vehicle), and also by the fact that DVLA are not necessarily notified when a licence
holder dies or emigrates, so there are licences issued that are not held by currently living UK residents.
What that does mean in practice, though, is that it would not be a significant additional burden on DVLA to issue a provisional licence to
every UK resident who does not already have a licence of some form. It certainly wouldn't be doubling their workload.
Mark
Mark Goodge wrote:So for the cost of 53 million 2nd class stamps, how much do you reckon
total of 53,157,460 licences.
It would also be interesting to know what percentage of the addresses
on current licences, are actually up to date
Apparently the DVLA can fine a driver up to +U1000 should it emerge after
an accident, that their licence address is wrong.
On 27 Sep 2025 at 19:24:10 BST, "Martin Brown" <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
On 27/09/2025 15:36, Max Demian wrote:
On 27/09/2025 12:27, Martin Brown wrote:
On 26/09/2025 17:28, Les. Hayward wrote:
On 26/09/2025 15:08, Pancho wrote:
I can see many private uses which could benefit from access to aWell we could also "benefit" from the side effects, just like the
nationwide public key infrastructure, everyone has a key. Much like >>>>>> we benefit from roads, railways, sewage, etc.
We could also benefit from public secure electronic mail, public
signatures. None of the old print out, sign and post, etc.
DVLA is able to sell our details to any old parking scammer & his
uncle...
Actually the DVLA driving license database system is almost up to the
job as national photo ID and central reference agency. Generalise it
so that all adults 16+ get a "driving license" but with no vehicles
permitted unless they have passed an appropriate test. Job done - very >>>> little adjustment is required (but mission creep will surely follow).
The way you can digitally prove you exact current driving license
points status with a one time code when hiring a vehicle is quite
impressive.
Then the "one time code" could be extended to release information on
whether you have been recorded for "non crime hate incidents" and the rest. >>>
On the way to a Chinese style "social credit" system.
Blair's original ID scheme would have allowed a wide array of petty
officials to see all our details, with little to stop those from
gossiping about them.
Are you really that paranoid?
I am! We know from the regular prosecution of police workers (obviously just the ones who are caught) that petty criminals can easily access computer records via corrupt staff. The scope for malicious gossip, vigilantism, financial exploitation and blackmail is obvious. Apart from anything a malign government might decide to do. And there is currently a significant risk of such a government being elected.
On 9/27/25 22:35, Mark Goodge wrote:
ONot wanting to dis the idea, it sounds very promising, but you would
As of the most recent figures issued by DVLA, there are 42,719,184 full
licences and 10,438,276 provisional licences currently active, making a
total of 53,157,460 licences.
The total population of the UK is somewhere in the vicinity of
68,300,000. So around 78% of the population already has a licence.
That's more than the adult (18+) population of the UK, which is around
52,000,000, or 76% of the total population. Although that's partly
explained by the fact that you can get a provisional licence as young
as 15 (for certain types of vehicle), and also by the fact that DVLA
are not necessarily notified when a licence holder dies or emigrates,
so there are licences issued that are not held by currently living UK
residents.
What that does mean in practice, though, is that it would not be a
significant additional burden on DVLA to issue a provisional licence to
every UK resident who does not already have a licence of some form. It
certainly wouldn't be doubling their workload.
Mark
also need ID for visitors to the country.
So there would be extra work
noticing when people entered and left the country.
"Mark Goodge" <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote in message news:q7lgdktuc57c11fsfam885am9mknth6bik@4ax.com...
On Sat, 27 Sep 2025 19:56:56 +0100, Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:
On 27/09/2025 14:40, Jon Ribbens wrote:
On 2025-09-27, Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
I can hear the groaning from Swansea when they are required to doubleActually the DVLA driving license database system is almost up to
the job as national photo ID and central reference agency.
Generalise it so that all adults 16+ get a "driving license" but
with no vehicles permitted unless they have passed an appropriate
test. Job done - very little adjustment is required (but mission
creep will surely follow).
Yes, I've suggested this before - allow the issuing of driving
licences with no vehicle categories listed, for people too young to
drive or people who cannot drive for medical reasons. Problem solved:
cheap, convenient, universally-recognised government-issued
photographic ID for everyone.
the number of licences they have to issue - without any additional >>>resources no doubt.
(I have no idea what proportion of the total population already have a >>>licence.)
As of the most recent figures issued by DVLA, there are 42,719,184 full
licences and 10,438,276 provisional licences currently active, making a
total of 53,157,460 licences.
The total population of the UK is somewhere in the vicinity of
68,300,000. So around 78% of the population already has a licence.
That's more than the adult (18+) population of the UK, which is around
52,000,000, or 76% of the total population. Although that's partly
explained by the fact that you can get a provisional licence as young
as 15 (for certain types of vehicle), and also by the fact that DVLA
are not necessarily notified when a licence holder dies or emigrates,
so there are licences issued that are not held by currently living UK
residents.
What that does mean in practice, though, is that it would not be a
significant additional burden on DVLA to issue a provisional licence to
every UK resident who does not already have a licence of some form. It
certainly wouldn't be doubling their workload.
Mark
It would also be interesting to know what percentage of the addresses on current licences, are actually up to date
On 9/27/25 22:35, Mark Goodge wrote:
O
As of the most recent figures issued by DVLA, there are 42,719,184 full
licences and 10,438,276 provisional licences currently active, making a
total of 53,157,460 licences.
The total population of the UK is somewhere in the vicinity of
68,300,000.
So around 78% of the population already has a licence. That's more
than the adult (18+) population of the UK, which is around
52,000,000, or 76% of the total population. Although that's partly
explained by the fact that you can get a provisional licence as young
as 15 (for certain types of vehicle), and also by the fact that DVLA
are not necessarily notified when a licence holder dies or emigrates,
so there are licences issued that are not held by currently living UK
residents.
What that does mean in practice, though, is that it would not be a
significant additional burden on DVLA to issue a provisional licence to
every UK resident who does not already have a licence of some form. It
certainly wouldn't be doubling their workload.
Not wanting to dis the idea, it sounds very promising, but you would
also need ID for visitors to the country.
So there would be extra work
noticing when people entered and left the country.
"Mark Goodge" <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote in message news:q7lgdktuc57c11fsfam885am9mknth6bik@4ax.com...
On Sat, 27 Sep 2025 19:56:56 +0100, Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:
On 27/09/2025 14:40, Jon Ribbens wrote:
On 2025-09-27, Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
I can hear the groaning from Swansea when they are required to doubleActually the DVLA driving license database system is almost up to the >>>>> job as national photo ID and central reference agency. Generalise it so >>>>> that all adults 16+ get a "driving license" but with no vehiclesYes, I've suggested this before - allow the issuing of driving licences >>>> with no vehicle categories listed, for people too young to drive or
permitted unless they have passed an appropriate test. Job done - very >>>>> little adjustment is required (but mission creep will surely follow). >>>>
people who cannot drive for medical reasons. Problem solved: cheap,
convenient, universally-recognised government-issued photographic ID
for everyone.
the number of licences they have to issue - without any additional
resources no doubt.
(I have no idea what proportion of the total population already have a
licence.)
As of the most recent figures issued by DVLA, there are 42,719,184 full
licences and 10,438,276 provisional licences currently active, making a
total of 53,157,460 licences.
The total population of the UK is somewhere in the vicinity of 68,300,000. >> So around 78% of the population already has a licence. That's more than the >> adult (18+) population of the UK, which is around 52,000,000, or 76% of the >> total population. Although that's partly explained by the fact that you can >> get a provisional licence as young as 15 (for certain types of vehicle), and >> also by the fact that DVLA are not necessarily notified when a licence
holder dies or emigrates, so there are licences issued that are not held by >> currently living UK residents.
What that does mean in practice, though, is that it would not be a
significant additional burden on DVLA to issue a provisional licence to
every UK resident who does not already have a licence of some form. It
certainly wouldn't be doubling their workload.
Mark
It would also be interesting to know what percentage of the addresses
on current licences, are actually up to date
Apparently the DVLA can fine a driver up to u1000 should it emerge after
an accident, that their licence address is wrong.
As a correct current address is clearly necessary in order to be able to communicate with the licence holder. Should this prove necessary.
So clearly the same would apply to Licence/ID cards. They would not only
be a proof of photo ID but also of the person's current address
Which presumably already imposes an additional burden on people who
move around a lot
Same as with insurance ?
Does having the wrong address on a licence affect the insurance ?"
Well no it shouldn't do; as this doesn't affect a person's ability to
drive.
However.....Annual premiums are calculated on the location of the insured driver. So if a driver changes their address are they obliged to immediately tell the insurer, or simply wait until renewal ?
Well again, this doesn't affect a person ability to drive. Although it
may change the risk.
However, presumably once the annual premium has been calculated and paid
at the drivers current address, in the absence of any other changes
this then is a binding, year long contract.
So having the wrong address on the licence shouldn't affect the
insurance.
So a maximum u1000 fine it is, then.
So what will be the fine for having the wrong address on your ID card ?
Perhaps that rule could be intrpoduced here, courtesy of the ID card?
And why not?
On 28/09/2025 08:54 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
It would also be interesting to know what percentage of the addresses
on current licences, are actually up to date
Apparently the DVLA can fine a driver up to -u1000 should it emerge after
an accident, that their licence address is wrong.
As a correct current address is clearly necessary in order to be able to
communicate with the licence holder. Should this prove necessary.
Interesting. At present, nobody has a duty to keep the authorities up to date with their address (except for people with specific orders to do
so, such as those on the Sex Offenders Register or otherwise under some
sort of official supervision such as probation or early release from prison).
But I have read that some countries, even in the EU, do put such an obligation on every resident. In such a situation, there's less trouble
for the public sector in notifying persons of decisions, demands, obligations, etc.
Perhaps that rule could be intrpoduced here, courtesy of the ID card?
And why not?
Interesting. At present, nobody has a duty to keep the authorities up to
date with their address (except for people with specific orders to do
so, such as those on the Sex Offenders Register or otherwise under some
sort of official supervision such as probation or early release from
prison).
But I have read that some countries, even in the EU, do put such an obligation on every resident. In such a situation, there's less trouble
for the public sector in notifying persons of decisions, demands, obligations, etc.
Perhaps that rule could be introduced here, courtesy of the ID card?
And why not?
On Sun, 28 Sep 2025 07:48:54 +0100, Pancho wrote:
On 9/27/25 22:35, Mark Goodge wrote:
ONot wanting to dis the idea, it sounds very promising, but you would
As of the most recent figures issued by DVLA, there are 42,719,184 full
licences and 10,438,276 provisional licences currently active, making a
total of 53,157,460 licences.
The total population of the UK is somewhere in the vicinity of
68,300,000. So around 78% of the population already has a licence.
That's more than the adult (18+) population of the UK, which is around
52,000,000, or 76% of the total population. Although that's partly
explained by the fact that you can get a provisional licence as young
as 15 (for certain types of vehicle), and also by the fact that DVLA
are not necessarily notified when a licence holder dies or emigrates,
so there are licences issued that are not held by currently living UK
residents.
What that does mean in practice, though, is that it would not be a
significant additional burden on DVLA to issue a provisional licence to
every UK resident who does not already have a licence of some form. It
certainly wouldn't be doubling their workload.
Mark
also need ID for visitors to the country.
Why ?
So there would be extra work
noticing when people entered and left the country.
No. You just log the details they entered with, which will link back to
their countries ID scheme.
The biggest problem will be with people who do not enter by the channels through which such processes can be applied.
And there we return to the heart of the problem.
On Sun, 28 Sep 2025 11:40:25 +0100, JNugent wrote:
Perhaps that rule could be intrpoduced here, courtesy of the ID card?
And why not?
We don't want any of that foreign nonsense here, thank you very much.You must surely mean 2010 (when the last proposed scheme was scrapped by
Done and dusted in 2016.
On 28/09/2025 11:40, JNugent wrote:
On 28/09/2025 08:54 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
It would also be interesting to know what percentage of the addresses
on current licences, are actually up to date
Apparently the DVLA can fine a driver up to -u1000 should it emerge after >>> an accident, that their licence address is wrong.
As a correct current address is clearly necessary in order to be able to >>> communicate with the licence holder. Should this prove necessary.
Interesting. At present, nobody has a duty to keep the authorities up
to date with their address (except for people with specific orders to
do so, such as those on the Sex Offenders Register or otherwise under
some sort of official supervision such as probation or early release
from prison).
But I have read that some countries, even in the EU, do put such an
obligation on every resident. In such a situation, there's less
trouble for the public sector in notifying persons of decisions,
demands, obligations, etc.
Perhaps that rule could be intrpoduced here, courtesy of the ID card?
And why not?
Because it's none of the Government's business where we live and what we
are doing unless there is a specific, reasonable requirement.
up >> to date with their address (except for people with specific orders toInteresting. At present, nobody has a duty to keep the authorities
do so, such as those on the Sex Offenders Register or otherwise under
some sort of official supervision such as probation or early release
from prison).
Or people in receipt of DWP benefits, or who have to file tax returns, or pay council tax.
When a public sector body who deals with an individual needs to notify
them of anything, they will use the correspondence address they have
on file, just like any other body does.
But I have read that some countries, even in the EU, do put such an
obligation on every resident. In such a situation, there's less
trouble for the public sector in notifying persons of decisions,
demands, obligations, etc.
If the individual hasn't kept (say) HMRC up to date with his
correspondence address, he could just as easily not have kept his ID
card address up to date either, so there's little practical
difference.
Perhaps that rule could be introduced here, courtesy of the ID card?
Why?
And why not?
Because it introduces an extra obligation on people to do things they
didn't have to do before,
costing time and effort and perhaps penalties if
they forget to do it. And their address becomes available to a large
number of people who don't need it and who might leak it (just as
HMRC did with millions of taxpayers' addresses a few years ago, and
as the MoD recently did with hundreds of thousands of Afghans). And
meantime the existing system seems to work adequately...
Questions of how the system will work for people without suitable phones, or simply don't want the app on their phones, have yet to be answered.I'd just love to get a job, but I don't have a 'phone!
On 28/09/2025 08:54 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
However.....Annual premiums are calculated on the location of the insured
driver. So if a driver changes their address are they obliged to immediately >> tell the insurer, or simply wait until renewal ?
They're better off doing it straight away. A change of address (from say, Twickenham to
Hackney) can affect the risk to the insurer and they're entitled to adjust the premium
in the light of that. It's a contractual obligation.
However, presumably once the annual premium has been calculated and paid
at the drivers current address, in the absence of any other changes
this then is a binding, year long contract.
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote in message news:mjshkpFfdhmU1@mid.individual.net...
On 28/09/2025 08:54 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
However.....Annual premiums are calculated on the location of the insured >>> driver. So if a driver changes their address are they obliged to immediately
tell the insurer, or simply wait until renewal ?
They're better off doing it straight away. A change of address (from say, Twickenham to
Hackney) can affect the risk to the insurer and they're entitled to adjust the premium
in the light of that. It's a contractual obligation.
Indeed. To imagine otherwise was rather foolish on my part.
However, presumably once the annual premium has been calculated and paid >>> at the drivers current address, in the absence of any other changes
this then is a binding, year long contract.
Which is clearly patent nonsense.
On 29/09/2025 11:09 am, billy bookcase wrote:
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote in message
news:mjshkpFfdhmU1@mid.individual.net...
On 28/09/2025 08:54 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
However.....Annual premiums are calculated on the location of the insured >>>> driver. So if a driver changes their address are they obliged to immediately
tell the insurer, or simply wait until renewal ?
They're better off doing it straight away. A change of address (from say, Twickenham
to
Hackney) can affect the risk to the insurer and they're entitled to adjust the
premium
in the light of that. It's a contractual obligation.
Indeed. To imagine otherwise was rather foolish on my part.
That's very gracious
However, presumably once the annual premium has been calculated and paid >>>> at the drivers current address, in the absence of any other changes
this then is a binding, year long contract.
Which is clearly patent nonsense.
Obviously. And not written by me.
On 28/09/2025 05:26 pm, Max Demian wrote:
On 28/09/2025 11:40, JNugent wrote:
On 28/09/2025 08:54 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
It would also be interesting to know what percentage of the addresses
on current licences, are actually up to date
Apparently the DVLA can fine a driver up to -u1000 should it emerge
after
an accident, that their licence address is wrong.
As a correct current address is clearly necessary in order to be
able to
communicate with the licence holder. Should this prove necessary.
Interesting. At present, nobody has a duty to keep the authorities up
to date with their address (except for people with specific orders to
do so, such as those on the Sex Offenders Register or otherwise under
some sort of official supervision such as probation or early release
from prison).
But I have read that some countries, even in the EU, do put such an
obligation on every resident. In such a situation, there's less
trouble for the public sector in notifying persons of decisions,
demands, obligations, etc.
Perhaps that rule could be intrpoduced here, courtesy of the ID card?
And why not?
Because it's none of the Government's business where we live and what
we are doing unless there is a specific, reasonable requirement.
But when there IS a "specific, reasonable requirement", it's a bit too
late unless the address is already recorded.
But even so, there are a number of reasons why one's address (or
principal address) certainly IS the legitimate business of the government.
On 26/09/2025 17:46, Mark Goodge wrote:
<snip>>
Questions of how the system will work for people without suitableI'd just love to get a job, but I don't have a 'phone!
phones, or
simply don't want the app on their phones, have yet to be answered.
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote in message news:mjvhbcF4obU1@mid.individual.net...
On 29/09/2025 11:09 am, billy bookcase wrote:
"JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote in message
news:mjshkpFfdhmU1@mid.individual.net...
On 28/09/2025 08:54 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
However.....Annual premiums are calculated on the location of the insured >>>>> driver. So if a driver changes their address are they obliged to immediately
tell the insurer, or simply wait until renewal ?
They're better off doing it straight away. A change of address (from say, Twickenham
to
Hackney) can affect the risk to the insurer and they're entitled to adjust the
premium
in the light of that. It's a contractual obligation.
Indeed. To imagine otherwise was rather foolish on my part.
That's very gracious
Eh ?
What's so "very gracious" about admitting to making a mistake ?
This *is* a public forum you know ; and not a private exchange of emails
However, presumably once the annual premium has been calculated and paid >>>>> at the drivers current address, in the absence of any other changes
this then is a binding, year long contract.
Which is clearly patent nonsense.
Obviously. And not written by me.
Obviously not.
Given it was preceded, at that stage at least, by four chevrons.
Again, admitting to occasionally posting patent nonsense, is nothing to
be ashamed of.
Although for some posters at least, it would seem that any such admission
on their part, might seemingly lead to an irretrievable psychological breakdown. Leaving them as quivering wrecks.
And so is to be avoided at all costs.
Not that I'm naming names, or anything
On 28/09/2025 19:16, JNugent wrote:
On 28/09/2025 05:26 pm, Max Demian wrote:
On 28/09/2025 11:40, JNugent wrote:
On 28/09/2025 08:54 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
It would also be interesting to know what percentage of the addresses >>>>> on current licences, are actually up to date
Apparently the DVLA can fine a driver up to -u1000 should it emerge >>>>> after
an accident, that their licence address is wrong.
As a correct current address is clearly necessary in order to be
able to
communicate with the licence holder. Should this prove necessary.
Interesting. At present, nobody has a duty to keep the authorities
up to date with their address (except for people with specific
orders to do so, such as those on the Sex Offenders Register or
otherwise under some sort of official supervision such as probation
or early release from prison).
But I have read that some countries, even in the EU, do put such an
obligation on every resident. In such a situation, there's less
trouble for the public sector in notifying persons of decisions,
demands, obligations, etc.
Perhaps that rule could be intrpoduced here, courtesy of the ID
card? And why not?
Because it's none of the Government's business where we live and what
we are doing unless there is a specific, reasonable requirement.
But when there IS a "specific, reasonable requirement", it's a bit too
late unless the address is already recorded.
But even so, there are a number of reasons why one's address (or
principal address) certainly IS the legitimate business of the
government.
So, on those occasions, I shall provide it if I am convinced that they
need it and I don't consider the requirement to be onerous.
On 29/09/2025 06:33 pm, Max Demian wrote:
On 28/09/2025 19:16, JNugent wrote:
On 28/09/2025 05:26 pm, Max Demian wrote:
On 28/09/2025 11:40, JNugent wrote:
On 28/09/2025 08:54 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
It would also be interesting to know what percentage of the addresses >>>>>> on current licences, are actually up to date
Apparently the DVLA can fine a driver up to -u1000 should it emerge >>>>>> after
an accident, that their licence address is wrong.
As a correct current address is clearly necessary in order to be
able to
communicate with the licence holder. Should this prove necessary.
Interesting. At present, nobody has a duty to keep the authorities
up to date with their address (except for people with specific
orders to do so, such as those on the Sex Offenders Register or
otherwise under some sort of official supervision such as probation
or early release from prison).
But I have read that some countries, even in the EU, do put such an
obligation on every resident. In such a situation, there's less
trouble for the public sector in notifying persons of decisions,
demands, obligations, etc.
Perhaps that rule could be intrpoduced here, courtesy of the ID
card? And why not?
Because it's none of the Government's business where we live and what
we are doing unless there is a specific, reasonable requirement.
But when there IS a "specific, reasonable requirement", it's a bit too
late unless the address is already recorded.
But even so, there are a number of reasons why one's address (or
principal address) certainly IS the legitimate business of the
government.
So, on those occasions, I shall provide it if I am convinced that they
need it and I don't consider the requirement to be onerous.
How would you know that a government department (including any form of
law enforcement) had a legitimate reason to know your address, if they
could not contact you because they didn't have your address?
On 29 Sep 2025 at 20:29:22 BST, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
On 29/09/2025 06:33 pm, Max Demian wrote:
On 28/09/2025 19:16, JNugent wrote:
On 28/09/2025 05:26 pm, Max Demian wrote:
On 28/09/2025 11:40, JNugent wrote:
On 28/09/2025 08:54 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
It would also be interesting to know what percentage of the addresses >>>>>>> on current licences, are actually up to date
Interesting. At present, nobody has a duty to keep the authorities >>>>>> up to date with their address (except for people with specific
Apparently the DVLA can fine a driver up to -u1000 should it emerge >>>>>>> after
an accident, that their licence address is wrong.
As a correct current address is clearly necessary in order to be >>>>>>> able to
communicate with the licence holder. Should this prove necessary. >>>>>>
orders to do so, such as those on the Sex Offenders Register or
otherwise under some sort of official supervision such as probation >>>>>> or early release from prison).
But I have read that some countries, even in the EU, do put such an >>>>>> obligation on every resident. In such a situation, there's less
trouble for the public sector in notifying persons of decisions,
demands, obligations, etc.
Perhaps that rule could be intrpoduced here, courtesy of the ID
card? And why not?
Because it's none of the Government's business where we live and what >>>>> we are doing unless there is a specific, reasonable requirement.
But when there IS a "specific, reasonable requirement", it's a bit too >>>> late unless the address is already recorded.
But even so, there are a number of reasons why one's address (or
principal address) certainly IS the legitimate business of the
government.
So, on those occasions, I shall provide it if I am convinced that they
need it and I don't consider the requirement to be onerous.
How would you know that a government department (including any form of
law enforcement) had a legitimate reason to know your address, if they
could not contact you because they didn't have your address?
Because they have no legitimate reason unless you contact them to avail yourself of some government service or another.
On 28/09/2025 04:45 pm, Handsome Jack wrote:> On Sun, 28 Sep 2025
11:40:25 +0100, JNugent wrote:
up >> to date with their address (except for people with specific ordersInteresting. At present, nobody has a duty to keep the authorities
to
do so, such as those on the Sex Offenders Register or otherwise
under some sort of official supervision such as probation or early
release from prison).
Or people in receipt of DWP benefits, or who have to file tax
returns, or pay council tax.
When a public sector body who deals with an individual needs to
notify them of anything, they will use the correspondence address
they have on file, just like any other body does.
But I have read that some countries, even in the EU, do put such an
obligation on every resident. In such a situation, there's less
trouble for the public sector in notifying persons of decisions,
demands, obligations, etc.
If the individual hasn't kept (say) HMRC up to date with his correspondence address, he could just as easily not have kept his ID
card address up to date either, so there's little practical
difference.
Perhaps that rule could be introduced here, courtesy of the ID card?
Why?
And why not?
Because it introduces an extra obligation on people to do things they didn't have to do before,
But you already DO have to supply the government with your current
address for a variety of different reasons.
costing time and effort and perhaps penalties if they forget to do
it. And their address becomes available to a large number of people
who don't need it and who might leak it (just as HMRC did with
millions of taxpayers' addresses a few years ago, and as the MoD
recently did with hundreds of thousands of Afghans). And meantime the existing system seems to work adequately...
...until the Revenue, DWP, DVLA the police or the courts (etc) need the address and don't have it.
On 29 Sep 2025 at 20:29:22 BST, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
On 29/09/2025 06:33 pm, Max Demian wrote:
On 28/09/2025 19:16, JNugent wrote:
On 28/09/2025 05:26 pm, Max Demian wrote:
On 28/09/2025 11:40, JNugent wrote:
On 28/09/2025 08:54 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
It would also be interesting to know what percentage of the addresses >>>>>>> on current licences, are actually up to date
Interesting. At present, nobody has a duty to keep the authorities >>>>>> up to date with their address (except for people with specific
Apparently the DVLA can fine a driver up to -u1000 should it emerge >>>>>>> after
an accident, that their licence address is wrong.
As a correct current address is clearly necessary in order to be >>>>>>> able to
communicate with the licence holder. Should this prove necessary. >>>>>>
orders to do so, such as those on the Sex Offenders Register or
otherwise under some sort of official supervision such as probation >>>>>> or early release from prison).
But I have read that some countries, even in the EU, do put such an >>>>>> obligation on every resident. In such a situation, there's less
trouble for the public sector in notifying persons of decisions,
demands, obligations, etc.
Perhaps that rule could be intrpoduced here, courtesy of the ID
card? And why not?
Because it's none of the Government's business where we live and what >>>>> we are doing unless there is a specific, reasonable requirement.
But when there IS a "specific, reasonable requirement", it's a bit too >>>> late unless the address is already recorded.
But even so, there are a number of reasons why one's address (or
principal address) certainly IS the legitimate business of the
government.
So, on those occasions, I shall provide it if I am convinced that they
need it and I don't consider the requirement to be onerous.
How would you know that a government department (including any form of
law enforcement) had a legitimate reason to know your address, if they
could not contact you because they didn't have your address?
Because they have no legitimate reason unless you contact them to avail yourself of some government service or another.
On 30 Sep 2025 at 11:52:31 BST, "Roger Hayter" <roger@hayter.org> wrote:
On 29 Sep 2025 at 20:29:22 BST, "JNugent" <JNugent73@mail.com> wrote:
On 29/09/2025 06:33 pm, Max Demian wrote:
On 28/09/2025 19:16, JNugent wrote:
On 28/09/2025 05:26 pm, Max Demian wrote:
On 28/09/2025 11:40, JNugent wrote:
On 28/09/2025 08:54 AM, billy bookcase wrote:
It would also be interesting to know what percentage of the addresses >>>>>>>> on current licences, are actually up to date
Interesting. At present, nobody has a duty to keep the authorities >>>>>>> up to date with their address (except for people with specific
Apparently the DVLA can fine a driver up to -u1000 should it emerge >>>>>>>> after
an accident, that their licence address is wrong.
As a correct current address is clearly necessary in order to be >>>>>>>> able to
communicate with the licence holder. Should this prove necessary. >>>>>>>
orders to do so, such as those on the Sex Offenders Register or
otherwise under some sort of official supervision such as probation >>>>>>> or early release from prison).
But I have read that some countries, even in the EU, do put such an >>>>>>> obligation on every resident. In such a situation, there's less
trouble for the public sector in notifying persons of decisions, >>>>>>> demands, obligations, etc.
Perhaps that rule could be intrpoduced here, courtesy of the ID
card? And why not?
Because it's none of the Government's business where we live and what >>>>>> we are doing unless there is a specific, reasonable requirement.
But when there IS a "specific, reasonable requirement", it's a bit too >>>>> late unless the address is already recorded.
But even so, there are a number of reasons why one's address (or
principal address) certainly IS the legitimate business of the
government.
So, on those occasions, I shall provide it if I am convinced that they >>>> need it and I don't consider the requirement to be onerous.
How would you know that a government department (including any form of
law enforcement) had a legitimate reason to know your address, if they
could not contact you because they didn't have your address?
Because they have no legitimate reason unless you contact them to avail
yourself of some government service or another.
Or live somewhere where you will receive a letter to the "The Occupier" regarding the electoral register and/or council tax, or take up employment when your employer will contact HMRC on your behalf.
On Sun, 28 Sep 2025 19:27:53 +0100, JNugent wrote:
On 28/09/2025 04:45 pm, Handsome Jack wrote:> On Sun, 28 Sep 2025
11:40:25 +0100, JNugent wrote:
>> Interesting. At present, nobody has a duty to keep the authorities
up >> to date with their address (except for people with specific orders
to
>> do so, such as those on the Sex Offenders Register or otherwise
>> under some sort of official supervision such as probation or early
>> release from prison).
>
> Or people in receipt of DWP benefits, or who have to file tax
> returns, or pay council tax.
>
> When a public sector body who deals with an individual needs to
> notify them of anything, they will use the correspondence address
> they have on file, just like any other body does.
>
>> But I have read that some countries, even in the EU, do put such an
>> obligation on every resident. In such a situation, there's less
>> trouble for the public sector in notifying persons of decisions,
>> demands, obligations, etc.
>
> If the individual hasn't kept (say) HMRC up to date with his
> correspondence address, he could just as easily not have kept his ID
> card address up to date either, so there's little practical
> difference.
>
>> Perhaps that rule could be introduced here, courtesy of the ID card?
>
> Why?
>
>> And why not?
>
> Because it introduces an extra obligation on people to do things they
> didn't have to do before,
But you already DO have to supply the government with your current
address for a variety of different reasons.
You inevitably have to supply it to the agencies you're dealing with. Not
to the Milk Marketing Board and the local dog-catcher, who will be granted access to the ID card database "just in case". After all, only terrorists
and paedophiles could object to that. If you've got nothing to hide,
you've got nothing to fear.
> costing time and effort and perhaps penalties if they forget to do
> it. And their address becomes available to a large number of people
> who don't need it and who might leak it (just as HMRC did with
> millions of taxpayers' addresses a few years ago, and as the MoD
> recently did with hundreds of thousands of Afghans). And meantime the
> existing system seems to work adequately...
...until the Revenue, DWP, DVLA the police or the courts (etc) need the
address and don't have it.
That could just as well happen if you don't update your ID card.
On Sun, 28 Sep 2025 19:27:53 +0100, JNugent wrote:
On 28/09/2025 04:45 pm, Handsome Jack wrote:> On Sun, 28 Sep 2025
11:40:25 +0100, JNugent wrote:
up >> to date with their address (except for people with specificInteresting. At present, nobody has a duty to keep the authorities
orders to
do so, such as those on the Sex Offenders Register or otherwise
under some sort of official supervision such as probation or early
release from prison).
Or people in receipt of DWP benefits, or who have to file tax
returns, or pay council tax.
When a public sector body who deals with an individual needs to
notify them of anything, they will use the correspondence address
they have on file, just like any other body does.
But I have read that some countries, even in the EU, do put such an
obligation on every resident. In such a situation, there's less
trouble for the public sector in notifying persons of decisions,
demands, obligations, etc.
If the individual hasn't kept (say) HMRC up to date with his
correspondence address, he could just as easily not have kept his ID
card address up to date either, so there's little practical
difference.
Perhaps that rule could be introduced here, courtesy of the ID
card?
Why?
And why not?
Because it introduces an extra obligation on people to do things
they didn't have to do before,
But you already DO have to supply the government with your current
address for a variety of different reasons.
You inevitably have to supply it to the agencies you're dealing with.
Not to the Milk Marketing Board and the local dog-catcher, who will be granted access to the ID card database "just in case". After all, only terrorists and paedophiles could object to that. If you've got nothing
to hide, you've got nothing to fear.
On 9/28/25 11:52, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Sun, 28 Sep 2025 07:48:54 +0100, Pancho wrote:
On 9/27/25 22:35, Mark Goodge wrote:
ONot wanting to dis the idea, it sounds very promising, but you would
As of the most recent figures issued by DVLA, there are 42,719,184 full >>>> licences and 10,438,276 provisional licences currently active, making a >>>> total of 53,157,460 licences.
The total population of the UK is somewhere in the vicinity of
68,300,000. So around 78% of the population already has a licence.
That's more than the adult (18+) population of the UK, which is around >>>> 52,000,000, or 76% of the total population. Although that's partly
explained by the fact that you can get a provisional licence as young
as 15 (for certain types of vehicle), and also by the fact that DVLA
are not necessarily notified when a licence holder dies or emigrates,
so there are licences issued that are not held by currently living UK
residents.
What that does mean in practice, though, is that it would not be a
significant additional burden on DVLA to issue a provisional licence to >>>> every UK resident who does not already have a licence of some form. It >>>> certainly wouldn't be doubling their workload.
Mark
also need ID for visitors to the country.
Why ?
Because you want every person in the UK to have an ID. So that
employment, social care, etc are dependent upon it.
It would allow you to check which people hadn't left the country. With proper biometric support, it would be able to spot people entering the country under two different identities.
Immigration is a big part of what they want to do, or perhaps more accurately, a major selling point to the public.
So there would be extra work
noticing when people entered and left the country.
No. You just log the details they entered with, which will link back to
their countries ID scheme.
You can't rely on remote IDs, foreign keys from sources you have no
control over.
The biggest problem will be with people who do not enter by the channels
through which such processes can be applied.
And there we return to the heart of the problem.
Yes, and a proposed solution is to make it harder for unregistered
illegals to access UK employment/services. It is plausibly suggested
that this will make the UK a less favourable destination for illegal immigration.
On Sun, 28 Sep 2025 08:54:18 +0100, billy bookcase wrote:
"Mark Goodge" <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote in message news:q7lgdktuc57c11fsfam885am9mknth6bik@4ax.com...
On Sat, 27 Sep 2025 19:56:56 +0100, Sam Plusnet <not@home.com>
wrote:
On 27/09/2025 14:40, Jon Ribbens wrote:
On 2025-09-27, Martin Brown <'''newspam'''@nonad.co.uk> wrote:
I can hear the groaning from Swansea when they are required toActually the DVLA driving license database system is almost up
to the job as national photo ID and central reference agency.
Generalise it so that all adults 16+ get a "driving license" but
with no vehicles permitted unless they have passed an
appropriate test. Job done - very little adjustment is required
(but mission creep will surely follow).
Yes, I've suggested this before - allow the issuing of driving
licences with no vehicle categories listed, for people too young
to drive or people who cannot drive for medical reasons. Problem
solved: cheap, convenient, universally-recognised
government-issued photographic ID for everyone.
double the number of licences they have to issue - without any >>>additional resources no doubt.
(I have no idea what proportion of the total population already
have a licence.)
As of the most recent figures issued by DVLA, there are 42,719,184
full licences and 10,438,276 provisional licences currently
active, making a total of 53,157,460 licences.
The total population of the UK is somewhere in the vicinity of
68,300,000. So around 78% of the population already has a licence.
That's more than the adult (18+) population of the UK, which is
around 52,000,000, or 76% of the total population. Although that's
partly explained by the fact that you can get a provisional
licence as young as 15 (for certain types of vehicle), and also by
the fact that DVLA are not necessarily notified when a licence
holder dies or emigrates, so there are licences issued that are
not held by currently living UK residents.
What that does mean in practice, though, is that it would not be a
significant additional burden on DVLA to issue a provisional
licence to every UK resident who does not already have a licence
of some form. It certainly wouldn't be doubling their workload.
Mark
It would also be interesting to know what percentage of the
addresses on current licences, are actually up to date
By an "ID card" doesn't need to record the holders address as a
record of fact. It just needs to be an identifier.
The "Where does the person with this ID live" progression is handled
by another system - maybe council tax or electoral role.
Or - to reverse the argument - what happens when the "ID Card" has
one address, but the electoral role another, and the council tax
another and the DVLA another .....
On 28/09/2025 12:58, Pancho wrote:
On 9/28/25 11:52, Jethro_uk wrote:
On Sun, 28 Sep 2025 07:48:54 +0100, Pancho wrote:
On 9/27/25 22:35, Mark Goodge wrote:
As of the most recent figures issued by DVLA, there are 42,719,184
full licences and 10,438,276 provisional licences currently active, >>>>> making a total of 53,157,460 licences.
The total population of the UK is somewhere in the vicinity of
68,300,000. So around 78% of the population already has a licence.
That's more than the adult (18+) population of the UK, which is around >>>>> 52,000,000, or 76% of the total population. Although that's partly
explained by the fact that you can get a provisional licence as young >>>>> as 15 (for certain types of vehicle), and also by the fact that DVLA >>>>> are not necessarily notified when a licence holder dies or emigrates, >>>>> so there are licences issued that are not held by currently living UK >>>>> residents.
What that does mean in practice, though, is that it would not be a
significant additional burden on DVLA to issue a provisional
licence to every UK resident who does not already have a licence
of some form. It certainly wouldn't be doubling their workload.
Not wanting to dis the idea, it sounds very promising, but you would
also need ID for visitors to the country.
Why ?
Because you want every person in the UK to have an ID. So that
employment, social care, etc are dependent upon it.
It is quite simple. No ID no job, no social care. NHS medical access dependent on reciprocal agreements with other countries.
That doesn't require visitors to the UK to have any UK issued ID. They
will be travelling on their own country's passport documentation
(stamped in and stamped out if there is no visa waiver programme).
Having just travelled recently I was struck by how effectively the EU
now tracks UK citizens in and out with passport stamps and how useless
our borderfarce are by comparison.
I travelled through a UK airport where it is surprisingly easy to emerge from the domestic arrivals channel from an international flight. Customs
was completely unmanned.
It would allow you to check which people hadn't left the country. With
proper biometric support, it would be able to spot people entering the
country under two different identities.
You can reliably detect and log the electronic ID tag of a passport that moves through any border checkpoint.
But I'm not at all convinced by the reliability of existing biometrics.
It was touch and go about letting my wife into France. Required human intervention to sort out - possibly because her hair was styled
differently to the passport photo.
I've always had trouble with it after
running for a short connection too - for some reason I don't look like
me after running the length of a concourse to reach a remote gate.
Immigration is a big part of what they want to do, or perhaps more
accurately, a major selling point to the public.
So there would be extra work
noticing when people entered and left the country.
No. You just log the details they entered with, which will link back to
their countries ID scheme.
You can't rely on remote IDs, foreign keys from sources you have no
control over.
You don't need to. Only resident aliens will need UK issued ID so that
they can work, claim benefits etc. Most countries passports are robust against forgery at least at border control points - though much less so
when a bank clerk looks at them as "proof" of valid ID.
The biggest problem will be with people who do not enter by the channels >>> through which such processes can be applied.
And there we return to the heart of the problem.
Yes, and a proposed solution is to make it harder for unregistered
illegals to access UK employment/services. It is plausibly suggested
that this will make the UK a less favourable destination for illegal
immigration.
It might possibly but the sorts of employers that presently employ
illegal immigrants do so now in the full knowledge that they are
breaking the law. It might catch a few edge cases but that is all.
Very good as a soundbite though and that seems to be the objective.