Robin Wilton's esoterica

Gordon Brown used a speech at the University of Westminster to explore the topics of liberty and identity in today's Britain. I just wanted to take a moment to reflect on whether that should be cause for optimism or dejection. As usual, it's a little of each.

One the one hand, it's probably good that he's speaking on the subject at all. The effect of the information age on social identity is a defining characteristic of this decade. It's also good to see this Prime Minister describing the need for balance between the privacy of citizens' personal information - and all the various factors which are used to justify increased public sector use of that data... about which we were used to hear so much from the previous PM and Home Secretaries.

On the other hand, it is sad to see some of the old misconceptions and mis-portrayals persisting under the new regime. Take, for instance, this paragraph from the speech:

"And on those occasions where we already have to identify ourselves
- when we open a bank account or withdraw money, pay for something,
cross borders or register with a GP - citizens themselves are
recognising that it is in their interests to have a modern and secure
means of identification which better protects against crime, fraud and
illegal immigration and also protects each of them as individuals,
their property but also their privacy."

You probably noticed the casual elision of "opening a bank account, withdrawing money, paying for something, crossing a border...". Hold on a minute. Paying for something? Withdrawing money? Those are commercial-sector services and I don't have to disclose identity data when I do those things, so don't try and lump them in with the public sector services like frontier controls and access to healthcare where the government wants mandatory disclosure of identity, not entitlement.

I've heard people say that they love the convenience of "chip and PIN" payments now in the UK... because it means they can send someone else to the supermarket on their behalf, instead of having to go because a signature was needed. Or, of course, you can just pay cash. The cash and the PIN don't prove identity - they prove ability to pay.

Similarly, when I enter my home country, what I should be being asked to provide is not proof of identity but proof of citizenship. When I request healthcare from the National Health Service, I should be being asked to prove my entitlement to that treatment, not my identity. Indeed, it might be appropriate for my identity to remain confidential. Take, for example, the government's recent announcement that it is to vaccinate 12-13-year-old girls with the Human Papilloma Virus to protect against cervical cancer: proof of the girl's identity need not be required for that process - just proof of the correct age, and the means to check that each individual is vaccinated only once.

With characteristic sleight of hand, the Prime Minister is, at a stroke, praising the potential benefits of the information age while declining to exploit them on the citizen's behalf. Today's technology offers the means to make attribute assertions while protecting personal privacy. If Mr Brown wants to establish a balance between privacy, security and service provision, that's a theme he would do well to explore.

Like many of the loos I've encountered here [in Tokyo], the one in my hotel bathroom has a heated seat. (It also has a range of 'upward spray' options, but let's draw the veil of discretion over those for now). Now, living in England, I am as conscious as the next man of the potential shock inherent in a cold loo seat... but let me just say, contact with an above-body-temperature seat can be just as surprising to the un-habituated.