D
Deleted member 28251
Guest
Well yes, there have always been people who’ve insisted that subjects should be made to account for themselves. And our acceptance of our own subjugation supposes many (if not most) would desire this.
I guess one’s relationship with the idea relates to how much (and in what way) you identify with the state and its own agendas: therein lies the problem.
As a caution, I think it’s perhaps worth mentioning that in 2010 the government started selling your personal health data to pharmaceutical companies. This year, that is being extended to data collection companies (as Mozmar highlighted here a few weeks ago).
I accept that the government says it merely charges for information, it doesn’t sell it—but that seems even more alarming (the mere fact it has the information is being used to justify its dissemination). This is the official line:
“The data will only be used for health and care planning and research purposes by organisations who have a legal basis and legitimate need to use the data.”
I’ve looked for some detailed limits and assurances about this new ‘sale’ of information and I can’t find a full transparency account of what’s going on. Mission creep seems to be built into the project. And is there not a fairly obvious problem, in that the law makers are appealing to the law as some guarantee of safety? Effectively, they are saying that as we describe the rules you plebs can all relax.
The potential implications of current plans for things such as employment and health insurance seem mind-blowing. This current sale relates to all data the NHS holds about individuals. In principle, it seems the NHS app has an innate capacity to track the movements of the entire population 24/7.
As I recall, some months ago a software developer withdrew from the NHS app project for ethical reasons which have not been fully disclosed.
From my experience and perspective, the government’s apparent passport proposals seem to outstrip, in scope and purpose, any national ID scheme in existence in the world—ever.
The paradox is (as Nerak noted) that the only resistance will come from the Tory party itself—as some might recall that it owes its very existence to a loosening of the state’s throttle (it being partly constituted from an early variant of Covid which the state wanted to strangle, called Catholicism).
I might point to the state’s insistence on infiltrating and destroying legally protected trade unions in the 70s as just one reason to suspicious.
And in concluding, I might remind you of how one esteemed authority and state representative used people’s personal information fairly recently
Blacklisted builders launch mass legal action against Sir Robert McAlpine
Workers branded 'troublemakers' on shadowy industry database make multimillion pound claim against construction giant
>
As if you would ever have believed his guidance. Those fake tears on GMB led my prayers that he’d be exposed. Commons select committee next. Contracts. Sister, former pub landlord, scrubbers brother = Strangeways 
LOL 
