Refine search for Home

  Leave a comment      Email this to a friend TrustedReviews Newsletters

Countering this it has to be said some of the problems have no doubt been caused by the rather low key rollout of the device, and as such are of NatWest's own making. Though letters were sent out, they weren't backed up by any kind promotional activity, especially on the Internet banking site itself where it would be most logical. Hell, even some kind of TV advertising for a launch like this would have been welcome. After all, NatWest is ever so keen to tell people about its UK call centres, why not its enhanced security measures as well?

However, these mistakes don't undermine the fundamental benefits of the device. To my mind anything that improves security is a good thing, and I'm happy to put up with a small amount of inconvenience for it.

In many respects this is similar to the ever thorny issue of identity cards. Again, the government's typically ham fisted organisation hasn't helped, but there are plenty of rational reasons why we needn't fear the identity card or biometric information on passports. It only stands to reason that as technology becomes more advanced, and the ability to evade it more sophisticated, that steps should be taken to make identification more secure and verifiable.

Quite apart from the well publicised security benefits, there are some less high profile benefits. For example, an identity card will make it possible for paramedics and doctors to immediately find out whom you are, and find your medical records. This could save valuable minutes during an emergency situation, and if there's a chance this could help save a few lives every year then we're better off for it.

Of course there are civil rights issues, and groups opposing the scheme are perfectly correct to point them out. But a lot of these ought to be alleviated simply by being open, informing people of exactly who is allowed to access their information, and make it possible for anyone to find out if and when their information has been accessed.

Perhaps the most important acid test is putting firm boundaries on the police's powers in regards to identity cards. The fear, especially for minorities, that police will use any power aggressively is a real and tangible one, which has only been enhanced by the way laws intended for terrorist suspects have been used to detain people for anything but. The case of the rowdy Labour party member at their party conference springs to mind, and I'm sure there have been less publicised infringements as well.

However, the worst thing we could do is dismiss such plans simply because they might infringe, even slightly, on our everyday activities and inconvenience us. This is simply lazy, and is just as bad as the classic clichéd excuse in favour of identity cards: that the innocent have nothing to hide. Ultimately any such initiative must be judged on its merits, not simply on a propensity to maintain a status quo while complaining about all the problems it might help improve.

Add your comment