We've noticed a lot of drama re-emerging with the @DCMS IDVT (Identity Verification Technology) & the use of IDSP's (Identity Service Providers) which is something that we & @TruthTalkUK covered since 2021.
Some call it 'the end of freedom', but let's revisit what it is:
Since April 2022, landlords, employers & DBS checks may be conducted by using a IDSP to verify British or Irish citizens ID credentials.
The 'objective' is to improve mobility & to enhance security rather than using less secure methods. This *maybe* useful for remote workers.
The most important thing to note - not only is the scheme *not mandatory*, but other methods of verification must be made available for onboarding such as doing so in person e.g. landlord/employer or using the relevant UK Govt gateway in the process, e.g. DBS.
One concerning aspect of all of this is whether or not the *right to choose* other less invasive verification methods may be removed over the course of time, i.e. employers/landlords are forced to ensure people use IDVT for *all* checks or face fines etc.
Another is how all of this ties in with the UK Govt's 'OneLogin' system which is now live for five processes but hopes to fully onboard citizens from 2025.
OneLogin would provide a 'unique identifier' for citizens to access a range of Govt e-services as well as being available on a standalone mobile application.
This is also a source of concern surrounding privacy and surveillance due to identifiers & how data is tracked.
In summary, IDVT isn't the 'end of freedom', as some declared, but it's an important piece of the jigsaw puzzle of how many govts are pushing forward with #digitalidentity and their own digital transformation goals.
2⃣ There's *no joint ratification or amendment* of point 23 under the existing IHR (2005).
3⃣ Again, no matter the recognition or 'success' as they call it, re: digital #COVID19 certificates, they've been as useless as a chocolate fireguard over the past two years.
4⃣ The WHO published a guide last year on tech specs & implementation of digital documentation.
This acts as *guidance & recommendation*. It cannot be mandated under the IHR, even with a targeted Annex 6 amendment.
This doesn't override the decisions of its member states.
If you're not concerned about @NHSDigital using the Palantir 'Foundry' system, which will be used to process confidential patient data without your consent, then you should be.
Here's just a few examples of our concern from Palantir's Terms & Conditions, circa. 2020 ⤵️
What is the 'other data' that Palantir may collect from its Foundry software. Where is it stored & does it leave the country where processing occurs.
Will patient data leave the United Kingdom & be processed elsewhere like the #EU or 'other locations'.
Where are these 'other locations'.
Which 'third party' is involved in the 'datacentre security standards'.
On Nov 1st, the Health Sec. @SteveBarclay ordered GP's to comply with Reg.3(4) of COPI 2002 (below) to 'solely process' confidential patient data 'for a #COVID19 purpose' alongside Reg.7 of the Act.
A big concern surrounds those who already 'opted-out' under the National Data Opt-Out scheme.
This doesn't apply in relation to Reg. 3 of COPI where common law duty of confidentiality may be lifted for re: communicable diseases & risk to public health.
We all know the #NHS COVID Pass is as useful as a chocolate teapot when it came to 'slowing the spread' of #SARSCoV2 at home & abroad.
It's now abundantly clear why the Govt won't drop this scheme as it's part of an ongoing data grab which concludes April 30th 2023.
The COVID Pass drove 'Wayfinder' (NHS app) usage to record levels in Q2/Q3 in 2021 as well as increasing #COVID19 jab uptake while intl travel slowly resumed.
Any cessation of the CP between now & April '23 would mean a large drop off of users & most importantly, their data.
🚨 On Tuesday we reported that @SteveBarclay gave notice to GP's under Reg. 3(4) of COPI to process confidential patient information 'for purposes of #COVID19'.
What we didn't know is that this data will be shared on a platform connected to PALANTIR.
The NHS claim that confidential data will be anonymised in accordance with ICO guidances & patients can't stop this process under the National Opt-Out.
But then they mention about 'pseudoanonymity' later on which is NOT anonymity.
Pseudoanonymous data can be re-identified.
If you don't know who PALANTIR are & their association with In-Q-Tel & the CIA, now's the time you did more research on that.
We sincerely hope that @openDemocracy@Foxglovelegal make further ground in seeking JR against what's happening without patient consent.