Bye bye Public Services Card

Plumbthedepths

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

A centralised system that can cross check peoples welfare, revenue and general status e.g. married, permission to work etc, and which can easily share this info with other EU member states sounds like a sensible idea to me. It could instantly detect anyone working and claiming welfare, working when their permission has expired, woking while a spouse is claiming for them etc.

Apparrantely that makes me a right wing extremist, in some circles

Makes you wonder why FG just didn't introduce legislation for an ID card and have a debate in the Dail instead of the underhanded method they tried. You can be damn sure with those weasels in FG there was something underhanded going on.

thomas 123

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Makes you wonder why FG just didn't introduce legislation for an ID card and have a debate in the Dail instead of the underhanded method they tried. You can be damn sure with those weasels in FG there was something underhanded going on.

Sure you can’t have a debate in the Dail with Fine Gael.

If your Sinn Fein your point is invalid because your a terrorist.

If your independent your mental.

If your fine fail your on side.

AllGunsBlazing

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Makes you wonder why FG just didn't introduce legislation for an ID card and have a debate in the Dail instead of the underhanded method they tried. You can be damn sure with those weasels in FG there was something underhanded going on.

Acting the cute hoor is very much ingrained within Irish politics. It's practically part of our culture, sadly.

Nothing can be done in the plain light of day. It always has be done in the shadows.

TheRiverman

So our pathetic Government broke the law and now they want to try and change it.
Please people vote this awful shower out of Government at the next election.

Sleeper12

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

You surprised?

At this stage no. Not surprised at all. Wasted billions on Irish Water, turned Gardai against the public in the process, Children's hospital in the wrong place and it becoming the most expensive children's hospital in the world, rural broadband another blank cheque & more concerned with who broke the story of a TD making exaggerating or false claims in a civil action than what the TD did, allowed housing, rent and homelessness become a crisis. The list is endless and I haven't even mentioned the illegal sacking of Garda superintendents.

There is a very short list of things FG have achieved in government.

Sleeper12

TheRiverman wrote: »

So our pathetic Government broke the law and now they want to try and change it.
Please people vote this awful shower out of Government at the next election.

Everyone & their dog knew what they were doing was illegal yet they ignored this time and again when pointed out to them.

thomas 123

Sleeper12 wrote: »

At this stage no. Not surprised at all. Wasted billions on Irish Water, turned Gardai against the public in the process, Children's hospital in the wrong place and it becoming the most expensive children's hospital in the world, rural broadband another blank cheque & more concerned with who broke the story of a TD making exaggerating or false claims in a civil action than what the TD did, allowed housing, rent and homelessness become a crisis. The list is endless and I haven't even mentioned the illegal sacking of Garda superintendents.

There is a very short list of things FG have achieved in government.

Don’t forget the cervical checks, the 2 million fake breath tests, army and navy on their knees.

martingriff

The Highwayman wrote: »

Do you like the idea of facial ID camera's and micro chipping people too?

Are you the type of person who uses fingerprint or face scan to unlock their phone?

Micro chipping WTF are you talking. Plenty of countries with national ID card and none of that happens. Conspiratorial much.

As a matter of fact I use a design drawn to unlock my phones. I did use the fingerprint for a while but found it took 2 long

jimjangles

The government broke the law and now they want to change the law.
It's like Judge Dredd "I am the law".
Crafty feckers aren't they lol.

kippy

Fairly simple fix really to resolve the issue that the ODPC has identified.
Anything that helps reduce fraud and adds a simple single method of accessing numerous state services should be welcomed.
People ask for better public services, value for money and efficiency on one hand yet try to stop moves towards improving all three on the other.

TheChizler

thomas 123 wrote: »

Similar to eircode, how did that cost 20 odd million?

It didn't, the cost was €20M over something like 10 years. Wouldn't get much change out of a national rollout and a handful of people in an office to maintain it.

thomas 123

TheChizler wrote: »

It didn't, the cost was €20M over something like 10 years. Wouldn't get much change out of a national rollout and a handful of people in an office to maintain it.

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/opinion/eircode-there-goes-another-38m-down-the-drain-1.2972751%3fmode=amp

Not to derail the thread - but 38 million is the actual figure according to the Irish times.

You say national roll out? What roll out? It’s a code assigned to each address in the state. Nothing further required aside from assigning the location of each address in the database(using coordinates) for the website and for when you put the code into your phone for maps.

But like this card system id love to see the actual breakdown of costs, where did the money go exactly?

TheChizler

thomas 123 wrote: »

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/opinion/eircode-there-goes-another-38m-down-the-drain-1.2972751%3fmode=amp

Not to derail the thread - but 38 million is the actual figure according to the Irish times.

You say national roll out? What roll out? It’s a code assigned to each address in the state. Nothing further required aside from assigning the location of each address in the database(using coordinates) for the website and for when you put the code into your phone for maps.

But like this card system id love to see the actual breakdown of costs, where did the money go exactly?

I was only quoting you. my point is it was spread over a decade and the entire sum hasn't been spent yet.

But just to paraphrase what Dudara said above, its not just a database. Similarly to the PSC there's planning, consultation with stakeholders, software and infrastructure development, testing, sending a letter to every household in the country, advertising, integration with 3rd parties, forward maintenance, and about 20 other things I've left out.

thomas 123

TheChizler wrote: »

I was only quoting you. my point is it was spread over a decade and the entire sum hasn't been spent yet.

But just to paraphrase what Dudara said above, its not just a database. Similarly to the PSC there's planning, consultation with stakeholders, software and infrastructure development, testing, sending a letter to every household in the country, advertising, integration with 3rd parties, forward maintenance, and about 20 other things I've left out.

Ah ya 100% I was fact checking myself there.

dhaughton99

TheChizler wrote: »

It didn't, the cost was €20M over something like 10 years. Wouldn't get much change out of a national rollout and a handful of people in an office to maintain it.

And most of that will go to RTE through ads for eircode.

Eric Cartman

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

A centralised system that can cross check peoples welfare, revenue and general status e.g. married, permission to work etc, and which can easily share this info with other EU member states sounds like a sensible idea to me. It could instantly detect anyone working and claiming welfare, working when their permission has expired, woking while a spouse is claiming for them etc.

Apparrantely that makes me a right wing extremist, in some circles

How absolutely dare one of the most generous welfare systems in the world have any method for checking for fraud and establishing somebodys ability to work an immigration status, how very dare they.

Plumbthedepths

Eric Cartman wrote: »

How absolutely dare one of the most generous welfare systems in the world have any method for checking for fraud and establishing somebodys ability to work an immigration status, how very dare they.

There was no problem with the initial idea behind the card had FG stuck to its original intended use. Sadly arrogance always gets the better of FG. Now the state is looking at potential claims for breaches of GDPR from holders of these cards.

kippy

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

There was no problem with the initial idea behind the card had FG stuck to its original intended use. Sadly arrogance always gets the better of FG. Now the state is looking at potential claims for breaches of GDPR from holders of these cards.

The problem is, there are lots of people out there who were and still are against the very concept of the PSC. You can see them on this very thread. There's another subsection of people that have very little understanding of the costs involved in major projects and complain at will when the state spends money.
The states implementation if this, no more than the implementation of Irish Water and other beneficial and generally good projects is my main gripe. Its the latest in a long line of poorly planned and implemented concepts. Seemingly no one has learned from the previous ones.
The fix for this is legislation and no doubt some compensation to cover the possible GDPR fines. Hopefully there will be some learning but I doubt it. Every government, not just this one tend to overspend hundreds of millions of taxpayers money.

Calhoun

Big question now is if Doherty will go, so close to an election they won't want to be carrying this negative press, not along with the stealth taxes in the form of a broadcast charge.

McMurphy

Portsalon wrote: »

Is there any way in which I can notify the various Government Departments who hold my records that I am quite happy for them to retain my "massively sensitive" personal data* indefinitely and that I really couldn't give a donkey's turd for the worthless views of the DPC and the rest of the tinfoil hat wearing civil liberties nutjobs?

* (name, address, gender, DoB, PPSN, penis length and girth, foot size, blood group, favourite colour and mobile phone number)

Oooh you're a real mad bastard.

IAMAMORON

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Another expensive F**k up by FG, what a surprise......

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

I have no issue with the card being used to interact with the DESP, if the government wants to introduce an all encompassing ID card again no issue but it needs to be done in an open and transparent manner and put before the Dail for debate. As usual FG went the arrogance route.

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

That's fine if it did, but the required use by government for other services the citizen required has now being found to outside of the law. As I said another F**K UP by FG.

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Which makes you wonder why FG decided not to introduce an identity card in the correct manner. The DPC is doing her job as set out in legislation. She's competent, FG have been shown to be the opposite and quite willing to play fast and loose with taxpayers money. I suggest your direct your irritation at those responsible for this F**k Up and not the person who is fulfilling the functions of her office.
Just as an aside , why were you delighted? Curious comment tbh.

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Of course you don't need my approval just pointing out you are completely wrong in whom you are blaming for this F**k up . The fault unless you have a bias is entirely the fault of government as pointed out by almost every commentator since the DPC made her finding .
You still never explained your delight with the card, any interest in doing so?

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

This F**k up by FG has cost the taxpayers of this country 60 million and has made the state liable for data protection breaches if individuals wish to sue even if they suffered no harm. Take a bow FG you absolute bunch of incompetent imbeciles.

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Thanks it's a forum for opinions and expression however your sarcasm is noted. Any thoughts yourself on the f**k up considering you are a state employee?

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Makes you wonder why FG just didn't introduce legislation for an ID card and have a debate in the Dail instead of the underhanded method they tried. You can be damn sure with those weasels in FG there was something underhanded going on.

I appreciate you are not a fan of Fine Gael....

What I fail to understand is how you are blaming them as a result of a legal ruling? Surely such rulings are beyond their control?

This is more of a rational response to your posts as opposed to a question. I respect they mightn't be getting your vote any time soon.

ddarcy

IAMAMORON wrote: »

What I fail to understand is how you are blaming them as a result of a legal ruling? Surely such rulings are beyond their control?

Through any normal legislative process the attorney general should have been consulted. If this was the case then I’d bet that this would have been flagged.

So either FG didn’t do this (the arrogance argument), the AG isn’t fit for purpose by not flagging it (the incompetence argument as FG appointed the AG) or the AG flagged it and FG ignored the AGs advice (the arrogance and incompetence argument).

One of the above occurred and whatever occurred makes FG look bad.

Plumbthedepths

IAMAMORON wrote: »

I appreciate you are not a fan of Fine Gael....

What I fail to understand is how you are blaming them as a result of a legal ruling? Surely such rulings are beyond their control?

This is more of a rational response to your posts as opposed to a question. I respect they mightn't be getting your vote any time soon.

FG were warned of the legality of what they were attempting several years ago by digital rights Ireland and the DPC. All warnings were ignored, due to the usual arrogance FG engages in.
You are correct they will not be getting my vote for a host of reasons, this F**k up is just another in the long line of F**k ups I've come to expect from them.
However it is strange you went to the effort of gathering every comment I made.
I'm guessing though they will have your vote no matter what.. ;-)

IAMAMORON

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

FG were warned of the legality of what they were attempting several years ago by digital rights Ireland and the DPC. All warnings were ignored, due to the usual arrogance FG engages in.
You are correct they will not be getting my vote for a host of reasons, this F**k up is just another in the long line of F**k ups I've come to expect from them.
However it is strange you went to the effort of gathering every comment I made.
I'm guessing though they will have your vote no matter what.. ;-)

Do you think they disregarded the warnings by digital rights ireland ? As an aside did fg engage digital rights ireland for advice on the matter, where their findings published ?

IAMAMORON

ddarcy wrote: »

Through any normal legislative process the attorney general should have been consulted. If this was the case then I’d bet that this would have been flagged.

So either FG didn’t do this (the arrogance argument), the AG isn’t fit for purpose by not flagging it (the incompetence argument as FG appointed the AG) or the AG flagged it and FG ignored the AGs advice (the arrogance and incompetence argument).

One of the above occurred and whatever occurred makes FG look bad.

Looks like your not voting for them again either.

Plumbthedepths

IAMAMORON wrote: »

Do you think they disregarded the warnings by digital rights ireland ? As an aside did fg engage digital rights ireland for advice on the matter, where their findings published ?

The fact the legality of the card is in question despite the warnings answers your question.
As for the rest of your comment, living up to your username?

McMurphy

They never seem to learn though, that's what's most worrying about them.

(In reference to Leo Varadkar) While acknowledging there would need to be "some changes around the retention of data and around transparency", he signalled ministers would move to legislate to strengthen the legal basis of the card.

However, solicitor and data protection expert Simon McGarr said this would not be possible under EU law.

"The system they set up is not amenable to EU laws. Had they wanted to have an ID card system they could have had one," he said. "You can't retrospectively introduce legislation which will give effect to a project as it stands at the moment that will be compliant with EU law."

Floppybits

Calhoun wrote: »

Big question now is if Doherty will go, so close to an election they won't want to be carrying this negative press, not along with the stealth taxes in the form of a broadcast charge.

There is no way Doherty will go, she would have to be either dragged out kicking or screaming or in a box. Even if she lost her seat she still wouldn't leave.

Plumbthedepths

According to today's Indo seems Doherty is challenging Madigan for the title of hide and seek champion.

Calhoun

Floppybits wrote: »

There is no way Doherty will go, she would have to be either dragged out kicking or screaming or in a box. Even if she lost her seat she still wouldn't leave.

She might not have an option if the pressure keeps up, we saw the impact Bailey had on the local elections they won't risk another case like that.

Floppybits

Calhoun wrote: »

She might not have an option if the pressure keeps up, we saw the impact Bailey had on the local elections they won't risk another case like that.

The thing is that FG have backed themselves into a corner now and they can't or won't get rid. If they got rid of Doherty then it would be open season on a few other FG ministers such as Harris and Murphy. I would also expect Doherty would not go quietly.

Calhoun

Floppybits wrote: »

The thing is that FG have backed themselves into a corner now and they can't or won't get rid. If they got rid of Doherty then it would be open season on a few other FG ministers such as Harris and Murphy. I would also expect Doherty would not go quietly.

Indeed it's hard on them as she is already very unpopular, there best bet now is that Miss Piggy will do something even worse and they can just drop her useless arse.

Portsalon

Eric Cartman wrote: »

How absolutely dare one of the most generous welfare systems in the world have any method for checking for fraud and establishing somebodys ability to work an immigration status, how very dare they.

In fairness to Bugs Dixon, she has stated pretty clearly that those types of application of the PSC are legal and can continue.

Portsalon

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Now the state is looking at potential claims for breaches of GDPR from holders of these cards.

Looking more deeply at that prospect and given that The State is taxpayer-funded we're looking at the possibility of taxpayers suing themselves for compo!

We're back into Banana Republic country and the only winners will be the lads and lassies in the flea-bitten wigs!

Plumbthedepths

Portsalon wrote: »

Looking more deeply at that prospect and given that The State is taxpayer-funded we're looking at the possibility of taxpayers suing themselves for compo!

We're back into Banana Republic country and the only winners will be the lads and lassies in the flea-bitten wigs!

Direct your irritation at the Muppets that allowed this situation happen ie...FG.

Dytalus

Portsalon wrote: »

Looking more deeply at that prospect and given that The State is taxpayer-funded we're looking at the possibility of taxpayers suing themselves for compo!

We're back into Banana Republic country and the only winners will be the lads and lassies in the flea-bitten wigs!

GDPR fines are not the same as compensation. A breach having occurred is not an immediate sign that compensation is due to the Data Subjects - nor for that matter is it a sign that a fine will be issued. As I mentioned before, the Commission's first goal is to ensure people follow GDPR rather than gather loads of money. If they believe the Government will work properly to address the issue now that it's been discovered, they may not choose to award any fines in this instance and save them for potential future breaches.

This practice is used by the DPC for private bodies too. So long as a body is seen to be making a proper effort to correct a problem, it doesn't award fines. It saves the stick until a body flaunts GDPR with no good conscience effort to follow it. And to protect taxpayers in the event of fines being given out to a public body, the maximum fine a public body can receive in Ireland is €1 million. Not ignorable, but not something disastrous that the taxpayers will have to pay for. URL="http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2018/act/7/enacted/en/print#sec141"]Data Protection Act 2018, Section 141(4)[/URL The bigger hit for a public body is the publicity which sours the governments future election prospects - which arguably matters more to some ministers than how much the fine is.

People can sue for compensation, naturally, but without any material damage done (for example, if someone can use leaked information to access your bank account - not applicable in this case, but as a general GDPR thing) it's unlikely that much in the way of compensation would be awarded. It's hard to say, there's not a lot of case law to use as an example. They'd need to make a case that they suffered harm as a result of this.

It's doubly complicated by the fact that the majority of this problem is one of 'legal basis for processing' rather than a data breach as such. Nobody's personal data has gotten unleashed or leaked to the world at large, rather the government had no legal basis to be processing data related to the PSC outside of social welfare. Still a data breach (DEASP shared the data) in the GDPR sense, but it's arguable that data subjects suffered any 'material or non-material damage' URL="https://gdpr-info.eu/art-82-gdpr/"]GDPR Article 82 (1)[/URL. 'Non-material' is fairly open, naturally. So it's not impossible it could happen, I just personally think it unlikely.

Portsalon

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Direct your irritation at the Muppets that allowed this situation happen ie...FG.

As stated earlier in this thread, I have absolutely no problem with the government's objective of developing a single identity document for interaction with state services. It's a complete no-brainer.

My objection is to the self-important dimwits who appear genuinely to believe that their so-called "sensitive personal data" is of interest to anyone other than themselves.

But then, as the great PT Barnum once remarked, there's a sucker born every minute.

Portsalon

Dytalus wrote: »

GDPR fines are not the same as compensation. A breach having occurred is not an immediate sign that compensation is due to the Data Subjects - nor for that matter is it a sign that a fine will be issued. As I mentioned before, the Commission's first goal is to ensure people follow GDPR rather than gather loads of money. If they believe the Government will work properly to address the issue now that it's been discovered, they may not choose to award any fines in this instance and save them for potential future breaches.

This practice is used by the DPC for private bodies too. So long as a body is seen to be making a proper effort to correct a problem, it doesn't award fines. It saves the stick until a body flaunts GDPR with no good conscience effort to follow it. And to protect taxpayers in the event of fines being given out to a public body, the maximum fine a public body can receive in Ireland is €1 million. Not ignorable, but not something disastrous that the taxpayers will have to pay for. URL="http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2018/act/7/enacted/en/print#sec141"]Data Protection Act 2018, Section 141(4)[/URL The bigger hit for a public body is the publicity which sours the governments future election prospects - which arguably matters more to some ministers than how much the fine is.

People can sue for compensation, naturally, but without any material damage done (for example, if someone can use leaked information to access your bank account - not applicable in this case, but as a general GDPR thing) it's unlikely that much in the way of compensation would be awarded. It's hard to say, there's not a lot of case law to use as an example. They'd need to make a case that they suffered harm as a result of this.

It's doubly complicated by the fact that the majority of this problem is one of 'legal basis for processing' rather than a data breach as such. Nobody's personal data has gotten unleashed or leaked to the world at large, rather the government had no legal basis to be processing data related to the PSC outside of social welfare. Still a data breach (DEASP shared the data) in the GDPR sense, but it's arguable that data subjects suffered any 'material or non-material damage' URL="https://gdpr-info.eu/art-82-gdpr/"]GDPR Article 82 (1)[/URL. 'Non-material' is fairly open, naturally. So it's not impossible it could happen, I just personally think it unlikely.

Thanks, and I agree with your post.

However, it should have been clear that my post wasn't referring to the DPC fining the Irish Taxpayer for the perceived abuse of the PSC, and so-called "illegal" retention of "personal data" (i.e. utility bills), but rather to the references by academics and others of the possibility of taking a class action against the Irish Taxpayer.

Plumbthedepths

Portsalon wrote: »

As stated earlier in this thread, I have absolutely no problem with the government's objective of developing a single identity document for interaction with state services. It's a complete no-brainer.

My objection is to the self-important dimwits who appear genuinely to believe that their so-called "sensitive personal data" is of interest to anyone other than themselves.

But then, as the great PT Barnum once remarked, there's a sucker born every minute.

Such is life you have no problem with what the government tried others including the DPC clearly have. Your objection seems to be based entirely on your own opinion and bias. The only dimwits I'm aware of are the Muppets who couldn't introduce this properly.
I'm sure P.T. would recognise you immediately.

Portsalon

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

Such is life you have no problem with what the government tried others including the DPC clearly have. Your objection seems to be based entirely on your own opinion and bias. The only dimwits I'm aware of are the Muppets who couldn't introduce this properly.
I'm sure P.T. would recognise you immediately.

Whereas your objection are based on the works of George Orwell and Franz Kafka! Read presumably in comic form, with lots of brightly coloured pictures.

Plumbthedepths

Portsalon wrote: »

Whereas your objection are based on the works of George Orwell and Franz Kafka! Read presumably in comic form, with lots of brightly coloured pictures.

See that's the problem you clearly have no ability to read. I said earlier in the thread I had no issue with the card once proper legislation was introduced and debated in the Dail.
Have a read back lad and don't be embarrassing yourself.

BarryD2

Portsalon wrote: »

Looking more deeply at that prospect and given that The State is taxpayer-funded we're looking at the possibility of taxpayers suing themselves for compo!

Chances are that the sort of citizens who will look for compo for this, are not taxpayers in the first place.

Plumbthedepths

BarryD2 wrote: »

Chances are that the sort of citizens who will look for compo for this, are not taxpayers in the first place.

How doesn't pay tax? There is more forms of tax than just PAYE. My parents are retired but pay lots of taxes just not PAYE.

Draco

Since it's been brought up a few times, the savings from detecting welfare fraud/overpayments with the PSC card up to 2017 were about €2.5 million after a €60 million spend:
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/average-fraud-saving-of-1-16-for-each-public-services-card-issued-1.3173443

Official (anti-fraud) savings up to October as a result of registering customers through face-to-face process for the card were €2.58 million, according to departmental records released under the Freedom of Information Act. Some 2.23 million cards had been issued at that time.

This means the amount saved due to capturing alleged fraud when registering for the card at that time was just under €1.16 per card issued.

The department has an annual budget of almost €20 billion. It has said separately it has saved more than €500 million due to other control measures to detect fraud and overpayments.

That's 0.00125% of the total budget for the department.

Welfare fraud is a much smaller problem than people assume.

The PSC has its origins in the UK talking about bring in an ID card but that plan was shelved and the PSC lumbered on.

I'd be completely opposed to a national ID card and I've certainly nothing to hide. The problems range from is it an offence not to have it at all times (ie. I go to buy a coffee in the morning and don't bring my wallet and stoped is it a crime?), what data is held (e.g. would religion be part of the information stored?), what data is printed on the card, who has access (not just restrictions on accessing the information on the chip but the government database), who can legal demand to see it, what happens if you're refused service for not having one?

When considering things like this you should always figure out what would happen in a worst case scenario (e.g. you have a lunatic stalker - could they get their hands on the info and weaponise it against you? or more extreme example - a far right hardline catholic government comes in - could they round up non-catholics on the basis of the information on the card?). Technology alone doesn't solve these issues.

Given the first pilot for the PSC was in 2011 (according to The Journal) I'm not sure FG should shoulder the entire blame - it would have been conceived under FF. FG should have listened to the myriad of experts that warned them there was no legal basis for this and shut it all down.

kneemos

Draco wrote: »

Since it's been brought up a few times, the savings from detecting welfare fraud/overpayments with the PSC card up to 2017 were about €2.5 million after a €60 million spend:
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/average-fraud-saving-of-1-16-for-each-public-services-card-issued-1.3173443



That's 0.00125% of the total budget for the department.

Welfare fraud is a much smaller problem than people assume.

The PSC has its origins in the UK talking about bring in an ID card but that plan was shelved and the PSC lumbered on.

I'd be completely opposed to a national ID card and I've certainly nothing to hide. The problems range from is it an offence not to have it at all times (ie. I go to buy a coffee in the morning and don't bring my wallet and stoped is it a crime?), what data is held (e.g. would religion be part of the information stored?), what data is printed on the card, who has access (not just restrictions on accessing the information on the chip but the government database), who can legal demand to see it, what happens if you're refused service for not having one?

When considering things like this you should always figure out what would happen in a worst case scenario (e.g. you have a lunatic stalker - could they get their hands on the info and weaponise it against you? or more extreme example - a far right hardline catholic government comes in - could they round up non-catholics on the basis of the information on the card?). Technology alone doesn't solve these issues.

Given the first pilot for the PSC was in 2011 (according to The Journal) I'm not sure FG should shoulder the entire blame - it would have been conceived under FF. FG should have listened to the myriad of experts that warned them there was no legal basis for this and shut it all down.

Would this Catholic government be called the caliban?

ddarcy

Draco wrote: »

Given the first pilot for the PSC was in 2011 (according to The Journal) I'm not sure FG should shoulder the entire blame - it would have been conceived under FF. FG should have listened to the myriad of experts that warned them there was no legal basis for this and shut it all down.

Sorry the issue isn’t that it was being used for Social Welfare fraud/ social welfare. This is still legal. The issue is FG decided, without the necessary legislation, to expand this to other areas. That has been found to be illegal.

So this is 100pct FGs fault. They can’t blame anyone else here.

Draco

ddarcy wrote: »

Sorry the issue isn’t that it was being used for Social Welfare fraud/ social welfare. This is still legal. The issue is FG decided, without the necessary legislation, to expand this to other areas. That has been found to be illegal.

Yes, I was adding information for that part - people had assumed a great deal had been saved so it was a justified project. I don't think the numbers support that though.

ddarcy wrote: »

So this is 100pct FGs fault. They can’t blame anyone else here.

I wouldn't be entirely convinced that the scope creep wasn't entirely planned from the start though. If I was pushed on percentages (and sure why not?) I'd split the blame 10%/90% between FF/FG - 10% for conception and the rest for an entirely terrible implementation.

Portsalon

Plumbthedepths wrote: »

See that's the problem you clearly have no ability to read. I said earlier in the thread I had no issue with the card once proper legislation was introduced and debated in the Dail.
Have a read back lad and don't be embarrassing yourself.

As I "clearly have no ability to read" there doesn't really seem to be much point in advising me to "have a read back" does there?

Unless of course you've previously posted some of those garish Kafka and Orwell comic book pictures that I mentioned earlier. Because I can "read" pictures.

Plumbthedepths

Portsalon wrote: »

As I "clearly have no ability to read" there doesn't really seem to be much point in advising me to "have a read back" does there?

Unless of course you've previously posted some of those garish Kafka and Orwell comic book pictures that I mentioned earlier. Because I can "read" pictures.

I'm at a loss to understand your attitude tbh, I had no hand or part in the f**k up created by FG. I do take exception to someone making claims on my behave that I'm innocent of . Take your nonsense up with the responsible parties. I'm done with your carry on.

tayto lover

I don’t have a lot of time for FG in general. I do like a few of their councillors locally who seem to be doing good work in many areas.
I have no problem with the PSC being used by Government departments if it makes my daily life easier when applying for passport, driving license etc.

How can it be exploited anyway?