I didn't quite catch that...

I should know better than to read anything from Samizdata or the Register. Because it quite often results in me foaming a bit at the mouth.

That that linked Samizdata article, for example.

The Bill would create an Independent Barring Board (IBB), which would maintain “barred lists” preventing listed individuals from engaging in “regulated activities”. “In respect of an individual who is included in a barred list, IBB must keep other information of such description as is prescribed.” [cl.2(5)]

Sounds wonderful, for-the-children and all that. But look a bit closer, and it gets nasty. Look at the sheer number of “regulated activities”, look at the number of organisations that can add someone to the blacklist, look at how little recourse there is for someone on the barred list. I particularly like this little bit:

11
(1)IBB must ensure that in respect of any information it receives in relation to an individual from whatever source or of whatever nature it considers whether the information is relevant to its consideration as to whether the individual should be included in each barred list.

(2) Sub-paragraph (1) does not, without more, require IBB to give an individual the opportunity to make representations as to why he should not be included in a barred list.

So many ways for someone to be added, and so few for anyone to be removed. And that’s not going anywhere near the costs of compliance, the inflexibility, the lack of any sense of reality about the nature of care work.

And then this Reg article.

The boss of UK police technology has warned that government attempts to use surveillance and databases to impose law and order could backfire unless those with access to the system are prevented from abusing the power it gives them.

Yes, it’s talking about a different system. But only because the new one is only proposed, not yet actual. Of course, maybe criminality and corruption will have been removed from every public sector organisation by the time the IBB comes into force; thereby magicially making all access to the system secure and above board. No mistakes will be made, no people will have their lives ruined by incompetence or malice, and all will be well.

Of course, if that was the case there would be no need for the IBB in the first place. So a system to try and protect people from abuse of the system will become another part of the system open to abuse.

A perfect example of government fuckwittery, don’t you think?