Brodie Clark and Jackie Keane

UK Border Agency News is published bi-monthly. Issue 6, the March 2011 edition, includes this article (p.5):

The Immigration & Asylum Biometric System (IABS) The latest in biometric matching technology will be introduced to the agency in 2011. The Immigration & Asylum Biometric System (IABS) will replace our current fingerprint system (IAFS) at the end of 2011 with the latest in biometric matching technology. Biometrics are used overseas, at the border and in country to establish a unique identity for each applicant. This is principally in the form of digital fingerprints and a facial photograph. Fingerprints are recorded and checked when individuals are applying for visas or biometric residence permits, and when asylum seekers require registration cards. The biometric information helps to ensure that decisions are made quickly and fairly and that the UK is protected. IABS will replace the current system while also incorporating additional features. It will allow biometrics to be taken, stored and matched with improved accuracy to ensure that identity is reliably established, whether at the border or within country. It will also improve the service currently offered by providing the flexibility to extend the system in the future should additional functionality be required. An exciting development has been the recent approval for the IABS technology to capture biometrics of visa national Games Family Members (GFM) during the Olympic and Paralympic Games in 2012. GFM include athletes, coaches, sporting officials, sponsors and the media who are travelling on the Olympic or Paralympic Identity and Accreditation Card. By replacing the existing fingerprint system with improved and advanced technology we are ensuring that the agency can continue to secure the border and control migration now and in the future. The IABS Programme Team, led by Programme Director Jackie Keane, is working closely with its suppliers IBM, Fujitsu and ATOS and the testing phase of the programme has started. For further information please contact Janis MacLennan IABS Partnership and Communication Manager on 0203 014 4297.

Jackie Keane is a senior civil servant. You'll find her on the UK Border Agency Senior Management Team organisation chart, November 2011. She wants you to believe that, thanks to the ability of biometrics based on facial geometry and flat print fingerprints to "establish a unique identity" quickly, accurately and reliably for everyone*, the border will be secured, migration will be controlled and the Olympics will be safe.

Brodie Clark was an even more senior civil servant. And when he gave evidence to the Home Affairs Committee on 15 November 2011 (12:18-12:24), he said that the fingerprint check at the border was the least reliable security/identity check, it is the ninth and bottom priority and, when the crowds in the Arrivals area threaten to become chaotic, it is "very sensible" to stop doing fingerprint checks.

They can't both be right.

That is the "confusion ... in this vital area of national security" that the Independent failed to identify. That is the scoop that Brodie Clark provided at his evidence session in front of the Home Affairs Committee and that the Independent and every other media organisation missed.

---

* Biometrics do not have this ability. The UK Border Agency News article is misleading

Brodie Clark and Jackie Keane

UK Border Agency News is published bi-monthly. Issue 6, the March 2011 edition, includes this article (p.5):

The Immigration & Asylum Biometric System (IABS) The latest in biometric matching technology will be introduced to the agency in 2011. The Immigration & Asylum Biometric System (IABS) will replace our current fingerprint system (IAFS) at the end of 2011 with the latest in biometric matching technology. Biometrics are used overseas, at the border and in country to establish a unique identity for each applicant. This is principally in the form of digital fingerprints and a facial photograph. Fingerprints are recorded and checked when individuals are applying for visas or biometric residence permits, and when asylum seekers require registration cards. The biometric information helps to ensure that decisions are made quickly and fairly and that the UK is protected. IABS will replace the current system while also incorporating additional features. It will allow biometrics to be taken, stored and matched with improved accuracy to ensure that identity is reliably established, whether at the border or within country. It will also improve the service currently offered by providing the flexibility to extend the system in the future should additional functionality be required. An exciting development has been the recent approval for the IABS technology to capture biometrics of visa national Games Family Members (GFM) during the Olympic and Paralympic Games in 2012. GFM include athletes, coaches, sporting officials, sponsors and the media who are travelling on the Olympic or Paralympic Identity and Accreditation Card. By replacing the existing fingerprint system with improved and advanced technology we are ensuring that the agency can continue to secure the border and control migration now and in the future. The IABS Programme Team, led by Programme Director Jackie Keane, is working closely with its suppliers IBM, Fujitsu and ATOS and the testing phase of the programme has started. For further information please contact Janis MacLennan IABS Partnership and Communication Manager on 0203 014 4297.

Jackie Keane is a senior civil servant. You'll find her on the UK Border Agency Senior Management Team organisation chart, November 2011. She wants you to believe that, thanks to the ability of biometrics based on facial geometry and flat print fingerprints to "establish a unique identity" quickly, accurately and reliably for everyone*, the border will be secured, migration will be controlled and the Olympics will be safe.

Brodie Clark was an even more senior civil servant. And when he gave evidence to the Home Affairs Committee on 15 November 2011 (12:18-12:24), he said that the fingerprint check at the border was the least reliable security/identity check, it is the ninth and bottom priority and, when the crowds in the Arrivals area threaten to become chaotic, it is "very sensible" to stop doing fingerprint checks.

They can't both be right.

That is the "confusion ... in this vital area of national security" that the Independent failed to identify. That is the scoop that Brodie Clark provided at his evidence session in front of the Home Affairs Committee and that the Independent and every other media organisation missed.

---

* Biometrics do not have this ability. The UK Border Agency News article is misleading

Lin Homer, Brodie Clark and Ron Noble

Ron Noble, Secretary General of Interpol, is in London to discuss security arrangements for the Olympics.

He gave an interview to the Independent. Interpol maintains a database of lost and stolen passports, and:

Britain is the only EU country to systematically check passports against those registered as missing worldwide. Last year more than 11,000 people were caught trying to enter the UK using lost or stolen passports. Britain carries out more checks against the database than the rest of Europe combined – 140 million last year. France carried out the second highest number, at 10 million. The UK Border Agency acknowledged the importance of the Interpol system, saying its high usage of the database was "indicative of the seriousness and priority we place on border security".

This is quite a turnaround.

In December 2004, Ron Noble lambasted the UK when he flew in and wasn't even asked for his passport number:

Interpol concern over UK borders The head of Interpol has told of his "surprise" at shortcomings in the passport controls at UK borders. Ron Noble, an American, said he was not asked for his passport serial number when he entered the UK.

The situation didn't improve and in July 2007 Ron Noble returned to the fray:

Interpol said last night that the UK makes just 50 checks a month of the database; France by comparison makes 700,000 checks and Switzerland makes 300,000 ... Mr Noble said that Gordon Brown's promise last week to share a list of potential terrorists with other countries had yet to materialize. "British citizens might be surprised to find that this watch list announced by your prime minister last week has not been sent to Interpol," he said. "Why is it that some countries make sure passengers do not carry a bottle of spring water on to a plane, yet aren't careful to ensure convicted felons aren't entering their borders with stolen passports?"

Someone took up the matter with Lin Homer, Chief Executive of the UK Border Agency at the time. Ms Homer kindly wrote back and said that UKBA had started to use the Interpol database more frequently in 2007 and, by 2010:

Around 70 million checks are made against the database per year and to date there have been 13346 hits and 5108 documents seized.

The UK has gone from 600 checks p.a. against the Interpol database to 70 million and, now, to 140 million. You don't get a turnaround like that unless someone makes a determined effort. Who? Lin Homer. Well done, Lin Homer, and thank you. And thank you, Brodie Clark, sometime head of the UK Border Force.

After their Ron Noble interview, the Independent published a leading article on 30 December 2011. Does Lin Homer get a mention? No.

Brodie Clark does. Happy New Year to you, too:

Equally, although Mr Noble may have praised UK immigration controls compared with those of our neighbours, the British system is far from perfect. Only last month, the head of the border force quit in a row over a relaxation of security which the Home Secretary claimed had been done without her knowledge. That Brodie Clark is now suing for constructive dismissal only adds to the alarming sense of confusion and buck-passing in this vital area of national security.

The Independent regards the actions of UKBA and Interpol together as praiseworthy but Brodie Clark gets no recognition from the newspaper for his part in protecting the border by making use of the Interpol database.

Certain allegations have been made against Brodie Clark and he disputes them all. The matter is being investigated by the Home Affairs Committee, the Home Office has launched three internal investigations and, at some point, an employment tribunal will be convened. What are the results of all those quasi-judicial investigations? No-one knows but the Independent feels itself already justified in pointing the finger at Brodie Clark.

There is "confusion and buck-passing" there. But in their unbalanced coverage, the Independent have not identified the seat of that confusion.

---

Update 8 January 2011
Mazher Mahmood, 8 January 2011, Sunday Times, Illegals enter the UK on ‘passports for hire’:

• Mr Mahmood identifies two people who got into the UK using other people's lost or stolen ID – a Sunday Times reporter and a lady who was sent to jail by Wood Green Crown Court in 2010. All the other illegal immigrants referred to in his article are in Greece, and not the UK. It looks as though UKBA are doing rather well, checking travel documents against the Interpol database.
• Mr Mahmood's article includes a quotation from an unnamed senior police source asserting that biometric checks would be more effective – no evidence for that assertion is given. Has Mr Mahmood perhaps been deceived by an impostor, a biometrics technology salesman posing as a policeman?

Lin Homer, Brodie Clark and Ron Noble

Ron Noble, Secretary General of Interpol, is in London to discuss security arrangements for the Olympics.

He gave an interview to the Independent. Interpol maintains a database of lost and stolen passports, and:

Britain is the only EU country to systematically check passports against those registered as missing worldwide. Last year more than 11,000 people were caught trying to enter the UK using lost or stolen passports. Britain carries out more checks against the database than the rest of Europe combined – 140 million last year. France carried out the second highest number, at 10 million. The UK Border Agency acknowledged the importance of the Interpol system, saying its high usage of the database was "indicative of the seriousness and priority we place on border security".

This is quite a turnaround.

GreenInk 4 – Private Eye blinks, misses a scoop

From: David Moss Sent: 30 December 2011 10:39 To: 'strobes@private-eye.co.uk' Subject: Brodie Clark Sir While the Eye joins in with the establishment rubbishing of Brodie Clark – in your case by quoting the ineffably smug Michael Mansfield – you ignore the improvised explosive device Mr Clark detonated when he gave evidence* to the Home Affairs Committee. The fingerprinting technology wished on UKBA is the least reliable identity/security check made at the border, Mr Clark said, it is the ninth and bottom priority and, if any check has to be suspended, it is "very sensible" to suspend the fingerprint check. It is presumably of no interest to you that the Home Office want to replace hundreds or even thousands of Border Force staff with a technology that might work in Hollywood films but certainly doesn't at Heathrow. Yours David Moss * http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=9445&st=11:36:43, listen between 12:18 and 12:24.

GreenInk 4 – Private Eye blinks, misses a scoop

From: David Moss Sent: 30 December 2011 10:39 To: 'strobes@private-eye.co.uk' Subject: Brodie Clark Sir While the Eye joins in with the establishment rubbishing of Brodie Clark – in your case by quoting the ineffably smug Michael Mansfield – you ignore the improvised explosive device Mr Clark detonated when he gave evidence* to the Home Affairs Committee. The fingerprinting technology wished on UKBA is the least reliable identity/security check made at the border, Mr Clark said, it is the ninth and bottom priority and, if any check has to be suspended, it is "very sensible" to suspend the fingerprint check. It is presumably of no interest to you that the Home Office want to replace hundreds or even thousands of Border Force staff with a technology that might work in Hollywood films but certainly doesn't at Heathrow. Yours David Moss * http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=9445&st=11:36:43, listen between 12:18 and 12:24.

GreenInk 3 – did Sir Gus O'Donnell abolish boom and bust?

Unpublished:

From: David Moss Sent: 22 December 2011 10:23 To: 'dtletters@telegraph.co.uk' Subject: Sir Gus O'Donnell, 21 December 2011 -- It’s risks, not rules, that must point the way http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/8971893/Its-risks-not-rules-that-must-point-the-way.html Sir Sir Gus O'Donnell quite rightly alludes to his influence on Gordon Brown's decision for the UK not to join the Euro. What other decisions did he influence? Sir Gus co-edited two books with Ed Balls. One of them, in 2002, congratulated Gordon Brown and celebrated the end of boom and bust. The other, in 2003, congratulated Gordon Brown for providing opportunity to all. Sir Gus, by then, had been our man at the IMF and the World Bank. He had been Director of the UK's macroeconomic policy and Head of the government economics service – every economist in HMG reported to him. He had been responsible for the UK's fiscal policy, international development and EMU. And he had become Permanent Secretary at HM Treasury. Gordon Brown had been none of these things. Yours David Moss Refs: 1. Reforming Britain's Economic and Financial Policy: Towards Greater Economic Stability, http://www.amazon.co.uk/Reforming-Britains-Economic-Financial-Policy/dp/0333966112/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1317602734&sr=1-1 2. Microeconomic Reform in Britain: Delivering Opportunities for All, http://www.amazon.co.uk/Microeconomic-Reform-Britain-Delivering-Opportunities/dp/1403912491/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1317602189&sr=8-1 3. Whose bust is it anyway?, http://www.dmossesq.com/2011/10/whose-bust-is-it-anyway.html

GreenInk 3 – did Sir Gus O'Donnell abolish boom and bust?

Unpublished:

From: David Moss Sent: 22 December 2011 10:23 To: 'dtletters@telegraph.co.uk' Subject: Sir Gus O'Donnell, 21 December 2011 -- It’s risks, not rules, that must point the way http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/8971893/Its-risks-not-rules-that-must-point-the-way.html Sir Sir Gus O'Donnell quite rightly alludes to his influence on Gordon Brown's decision for the UK not to join the Euro. What other decisions did he influence? Sir Gus co-edited two books with Ed Balls. One of them, in 2002, congratulated Gordon Brown and celebrated the end of boom and bust. The other, in 2003, congratulated Gordon Brown for providing opportunity to all. Sir Gus, by then, had been our man at the IMF and the World Bank. He had been Director of the UK's macroeconomic policy and Head of the government economics service – every economist in HMG reported to him. He had been responsible for the UK's fiscal policy, international development and EMU. And he had become Permanent Secretary at HM Treasury. Gordon Brown had been none of these things. Yours David Moss Refs: 1. Reforming Britain's Economic and Financial Policy: Towards Greater Economic Stability, http://www.amazon.co.uk/Reforming-Britains-Economic-Financial-Policy/dp/0333966112/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1317602734&sr=1-1 2. Microeconomic Reform in Britain: Delivering Opportunities for All, http://www.amazon.co.uk/Microeconomic-Reform-Britain-Delivering-Opportunities/dp/1403912491/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1317602189&sr=8-1 3. Whose bust is it anyway?, http://www.dmossesq.com/2011/10/whose-bust-is-it-anyway.html

Festschrift: Sir Gus O'Donnell 3

GOD retires at the end of the year and the eulogies have started. We should be grateful according to the Times:

Prime ministers’ spouses these days, he thinks, require more official help. “They have some support. I suspect it probably should be a bit bigger ... we need to recognise that the role is a broader, more public role these days. The media pay more attention to them, what they’re wearing.” So would he like a dress allowance for spouses for public events and more staff support? “It would be good to get the spouses together and it would be good for there to be cross-party agreement on this sort of thing.” He doesn’t want to prescribe whether they need a cook or hairdresser. “It’s one of those things you’d have to think quite carefully about. Different people might want to handle it in different ways.” And he doesn’t want their retinue to grow too large. “Keeping prime ministers grounded in the real world matters a lot.”

What a nice man. He thinks of everything. This new way of being generous with other people's money is his parting shot. A warm feeling to remember him by.

That's not how Sir Richard Mottram will remember Sir Gus. Sir Richard identifies seven problems which beset Whitehall:

1. how to improve the efficiency of the civil service and the wider public service
2. how the Cabinet Office can take charge of that improvement in efficiency
3. how the centre (i.e. the Cabinet Office? Number 10? Not clear) can keep control of its satrapies, the various departments of state
4. how the head of the home civil service can have any influence on the Prime Minister if he is not also Cabinet Secretary and permanent secretary at the Cabinet Office
5. how to ensure cabinet government as opposed to Blair-style sofa government
6. how to provide effective career planning/talent management for senior civil servants
7. how to provide leadership for the civil service

Six of those problems – all except No.4 – were there before Sir Gus's arrival. He hasn't solved them. They're still there.

But at least the idea has been floated at last that the prime minister's spouse should have a hairdresser  or a cook paid for by the taxpayer.

Festschrift: Sir Gus O'Donnell 3

GOD retires at the end of the year and the eulogies have started. We should be grateful according to the Times:

Prime ministers’ spouses these days, he thinks, require more official help. “They have some support. I suspect it probably should be a bit bigger ... we need to recognise that the role is a broader, more public role these days. The media pay more attention to them, what they’re wearing.” So would he like a dress allowance for spouses for public events and more staff support? “It would be good to get the spouses together and it would be good for there to be cross-party agreement on this sort of thing.” He doesn’t want to prescribe whether they need a cook or hairdresser. “It’s one of those things you’d have to think quite carefully about. Different people might want to handle it in different ways.” And he doesn’t want their retinue to grow too large. “Keeping prime ministers grounded in the real world matters a lot.”

What a nice man. He thinks of everything. This new way of being generous with other people's money is his parting shot. A warm feeling to remember him by.

That's not how Sir Richard Mottram will remember Sir Gus. Sir Richard identifies seven problems which beset Whitehall:

1. how to improve the efficiency of the civil service and the wider public service
2. how the Cabinet Office can take charge of that improvement in efficiency
3. how the centre (i.e. the Cabinet Office? Number 10? Not clear) can keep control of its satrapies, the various departments of state
4. how the head of the home civil service can have any influence on the Prime Minister if he is not also Cabinet Secretary and permanent secretary at the Cabinet Office
5. how to ensure cabinet government as opposed to Blair-style sofa government
6. how to provide effective career planning/talent management for senior civil servants
7. how to provide leadership for the civil service

Six of those problems – all except No.4 – were there before Sir Gus's arrival. He hasn't solved them. They're still there.

But at least the idea has been floated at last that the prime minister's spouse should have a hairdresser  or a cook paid for by the taxpayer.