29 ms·

> The UK is also shortly going to require all children to have a digital identifier to be used across government services. I hadn't heard about that one. Sourc

> The UK is also shortly going to require all children to have a digital identifier to be used across government services. I hadn't heard about that one. Source?

graemep 1y ago
Section four of the awful Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill https://bills.parliament.uk/publications/62773/documents/7087 https://bills.parliament.uk/publications/62773/documents/708...
- wizzwizz4 1y ago
  Edit: I somehow completely skipped the bad bit, right at the beginning. > 16LB (1) The Secretary of State may by regulations specify a description of consistent identifier for the purposes of this section. Such provisions are ripe for abuse – somewhat tempered by 16LB(6), but that relies on the designated person's discretion (which itself is constrained by 16LB(12), and my experience with educational folk suggests they take such guidance seriously, even when they profoundly disagree with it), and having a database in the first place is the major issue. Ignore the rest of this comment. --- That doesn't seem to say that? It says: > 16LB (2) “Consistent identifier” means any identifier (such as, for example, a number or code used for identification purposes) that— > (a) relates to a child, and > (b) forms part of a set of similar identifiers that is of general application. School ID plus some school-specific identifier would suffice, if I'm reading this right. That said, I'm not sure why you'd write this into a law under my interpretation, since it's already current practice to take actions that are "likely to facilitate the exercise by any person of a function of that person that relates to safeguarding or promoting the welfare of children", and to avoid actions that "would be more detrimental to the child than not including it", so maybe this is one of the things that you need to be a legal expert to understand.

> The UK is also shortly going to require all children to have a digital identifier to be used across government services. I hadn't heard about that one. Source?

graemep 1y ago

Section four of the awful Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill https://bills.parliament.uk/publications/62773/documents/7087 https://bills.parliament.uk/publications/62773/documents/708...

wizzwizz4 1y ago
Edit: I somehow completely skipped the bad bit, right at the beginning. > 16LB (1) The Secretary of State may by regulations specify a description of consistent identifier for the purposes of this section. Such provisions are ripe for abuse – somewhat tempered by 16LB(6), but that relies on the designated person's discretion (which itself is constrained by 16LB(12), and my experience with educational folk suggests they take such guidance seriously, even when they profoundly disagree with it), and having a database in the first place is the major issue. Ignore the rest of this comment. --- That doesn't seem to say that? It says: > 16LB (2) “Consistent identifier” means any identifier (such as, for example, a number or code used for identification purposes) that— > (a) relates to a child, and > (b) forms part of a set of similar identifiers that is of general application. School ID plus some school-specific identifier would suffice, if I'm reading this right. That said, I'm not sure why you'd write this into a law under my interpretation, since it's already current practice to take actions that are "likely to facilitate the exercise by any person of a function of that person that relates to safeguarding or promoting the welfare of children", and to avoid actions that "would be more detrimental to the child than not including it", so maybe this is one of the things that you need to be a legal expert to understand.