As for your constant comparison with banks. Firstly, there are several banks in the UK with the population distributed between them. There is only one NHS; it would cover everyone. It would be the jackpot. Barclays Bank. 1,800 UK branches and 4,750 worldwide branches. NHS: More than 10,000 GP practices and 2,500 hospitals. That's more than twice as many vulnerable access points. Barclays Bank: 147,000 employees. NHS: 1,500,000 employees. Even if we only count the 'clinical' ones who would have full access, that's 750,000 - five times more potential wetware problems. Barclays Bank income: £7,000 billion. NHS funding: £90billion. Doesn't even compare. And most of it is already spoken for. Barclays Bank reason for existence: to keep the money secure. Security is a major spend. Staff training is all about the security. NHS reason for existence: to provide healthcare. It cannot afford to spend billions on keeping a network secure. Staff are employed for clinical competence and security training will always be secondary. I for one am not happy to reduce the money available for actual real healthcare (ambulance staff, hospital beds, operating theatres) in order to fund a gigantic bespoke computer system for storing personal information.