Chip and PIN

[David Hansen]

On 24 Jan 2008 at 15:48, Ian Batten wrote:

> I suspect that his  colleagues will be having a serious conversation today. 

I don't have as high an opinion of them. I suspect they will be 
congratulating themselves.

> He came  
> across as smug, patronising and legalistic, and quite obviously  
> viewed the banks (with whom he probably has agreeable lunches to  
> discuss cases) as far more credible than individuals (inarticulate, 
> disorganised, sometimes working class).

As I have mentioned before, the man supposed to represent the views of 
rail users in Yorkshire had an important insight after he had been 
doing the job for some time. This was as closure of the Settle & 
Carlisle line reared its ugly head again. He was on first name terms 
with all the British Rail managers, having had many lunches with them. 
However, he realised that he did not have the same relationship with 
those who questioned the official line. He realised that as a result he 
would certainly not be seen as impartial by those outside the tent.

He therefore took steps to rectify this situation, by arranging to meet 
the usual suspects and get to understand their position and them to 
understand his. He had to do this in some secrecy, as he feared that 
his masters in Whitehall would not approve. Those outside the tent felt 
that for the first time someone official was talking to them, rather 
than talking at them.

As most of us probably know the Settle & Carlisle line is still with 
us, thanks in a fair part to the activities of this one man. His 
masters in Whitehall were indeed very displeased with him and took 
their revenge by abolishing his committee and combining the area they 
had covered in with those of other committees who followed the official 
line.

I think that story has parallels with the Home Office's stooges. Nobody 
who had any sort of a clue would have quoted a sentence along the lines 
of, "The Security Service welcome RIPA, having played a large part in 
writing it." without making severely negative comments about it.

>  I think it was Sara Cox who 
> realised that the PCC is nothing of the sort and you should bypass it  and
> take legal action immediately, and I came away from that  interview
> thinking the same of the Ombudsman: it's not worth  complaining to them,
> it's better to go straight to court.

The trouble is that the courts are being made more and more difficult 
to access. However, I think that the only thing smug officials and 
party politicians (sometimes) listen to is the courts (and sometimes 
direct action), they certainly don't listen to quietly made well-
reasoned argument. 



-- 
  David Hansen, Edinburgh 
 I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents 
me   
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54