Comments on: Times Online: Safety fears over new register of all children

By: Terri

Terri — Wed, 29 Aug 2007 17:47:01 +0000

it’s a shame that the media only pick up on things when it’s too late to do anything about it. The ‘contactpoint’ database plans were announced in November 2003 and the regulations finally got through just before recess last month, in the teeth of a struggle that has been going on for 4 years.

What hasn’t got so much as a mention yet is the *other* national database that will be created alongside it – announced very quietly by Written Ministerial Statement the day before recess. Called the ‘eCAF’ database, it will hold the in-depth personal profiles of every child requiring services. Govt estimates this will be up to 50% of all children. No doubt it will be spotted in, ooh, 6 months time when the regulations are passed.

By: Philip Hunt

Philip Hunt — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 16:57:01 +0000

information on the offspring of some politicians could be left off the main database

Nice to know that our lords and masters are not in the least hypocritical.

By: Jherad

Jherad — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 15:47:02 +0000

I believe the intended benefit is that it will help aid communication in cases of ‘at risk’ children, to prevent further cases like that of Victoria ClimbiÃƒÂ© (as per the Times article).

Which is of course bollocks. Databases don’t solve communication issues – process does. Just because I have access to a database containing employee details at work doesn’t mean I’ll ever call them.

We have so many databases already. If social services need better access to medical records, and doctors need better access to social services records, then look at that. Do we really need more?

By: Katherine

Katherine — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 14:55:52 +0000

I have to wonder – where is the actual benefit in this supposed to be? Nowhere in that Times piece is there any indication of what this is supposed to be for. There are any number of lists and databases that could be described in similar terms as this, but usually there is at least a justification to balance out the risks. Where is it in this case? Where even is the debate about whether the balance is a correct one?

By: James

James — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 13:20:25 +0000

Very worrying indeed if this database comes to fruition.

By: smallbeds

smallbeds — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 12:51:19 +0000

Simple. Pre-empt the database, and register your child on YouTube instead.

A “hilarious” video of them squirting water at the cat, falling off a swing or playing Buckaroo with a sleeping relative at Christmas will turn them into instant celebrity, and they can qualify for the opt-out.

By: Dave Hansell.

Dave Hansell. — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 12:01:10 +0000

IanP’s concerns on his blog seem to very similar to those expressed in the recently late (last friday, of cancer) Aeron Russo’s (Trading Places; The Rose) film “America: Freedom to Facism” to be found here:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1656880303867390173

The interviews are also interesting.

Some background info also at:

http://www.apfn.org/apfn/reserve.htm

and the late russo’s associated website for the film:

http://www.freedomtofascism.com/

By: jameshigham

jameshigham — Tue, 28 Aug 2007 06:23:34 +0000

This has a very nasty stench to it. I trust them not.

By: AMX

AMX — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 17:15:34 +0000

“The Ã¢â‚¬Å“shieldingÃ¢â‚¬Â mechanism will mean that information on the offspring of some politicians and celebrities could be left off the main database.” – The important.

As has been said before, everyone is born equal but some more equal than others.

Welcome to Animal Farm UK

By: Andrew Duffin

Andrew Duffin — Mon, 27 Aug 2007 11:28:56 +0000

330,000 vetted users?

Aye right. How much vetting will they be able to do on 330,000 users?

And how good will the security be?

(Yes that is a rhetorical question: we all know the answer).

Thank God my kids are past the age for this police-state stuff – at least until they have to go to the interrogation centre to get their ID cards.