OK, I've steamed the teeth marks out of my desk... SECURITY. If my bank details get disclosed due to error or malice, then I can change my bank details. If my medical records are disclosed, I cannot change them. You have choice as to whether to have a Farcebook account, play online games, use a mobile phone etc. You have (almost) no choice about being entered onto this database. The whole point about security is that if you gather together a large quantity of valuable information like this in one place, then it immediately becomes a honeypot for hackers. IT WILL NOT BE SECURE. The quote that comes to mind is one saying (loosely), "the only secure computer is one that is disconnected from everything, switched off, locked in a steel box, encased in concrete and buried a thousand feet underground. And even then, only maybe... You will have a large number of access points, and an even larger number of authorised users, each of which is a potential security leak. The NHS database, along with the proposed NIR, is so far ahead of currently robust technology that it is almost inevitable that it will fall over and leak. So as far as benefiting the NHS, ambulances and staff are a far better use of the money, because they WORK. Today, now, with the current state of technology. When an NHS database can be created which is a. secure and b. fit for purpose, THEN the NHS should consider paying for one. With today's technology it will be neither, so please don't try colouring me Luddite. Our present government seems obsessed with high technology as the solution to all problems, to the point of having solutions looking for a problem. There appears to be no consideration of whether it is the best solution, or even if there is a problem amenable to that solution. PRIVACY Do you wish your medical records to be used for other purposes? Medical research? Sociological research? Market research? The Secondary Uses are not particularly well defined, and are being carefuly obfuscated in press releases - all the attention is being diverted onto the Summary Care Record. Previously, your medical records were confidential, and required your explicit consent for any party other than you or your GP to view. The SUS changes that, with disclosure no longer being exclusively your privilege. NHS Spine, containing all your medical history Contact Point, containing details of all children (apart from MPs and celebrities - do they know something we don't?) National Identity Register, logging every time the system is queried, information retained for life ANPR system, logging all car journeys on major routes and in all towns, information retained for 5 years DVLA database, linking car registrations to names and addresses, at least for the law-abiding Independent Safeguarding Authority/Criminal records Bureau - retaining records of offences, arrests, cautions and even unconfirmed rumour and speculations, for life Communications database (proposed) - containing details of all phone calls, text messages, emails and web activity Separate databases, yes - but functionally separate? No reason why they should be. No technical reason why queries cannot be written to cover all of them, creating a population surveillance system that would have had Dzerzinsky or Himmler salivating madly. Would you trust this government with that information? (Actually, no) The next government? (No again) The one after that? (Still no) Liberties once thought part of the fabric of our society are snipped away, little piece by little piece, always for "improved service", or "managing your identity in a connected world", or "think of the children", or "protecting your security". If you drop a frog in hot water, it jumps out. If you drop the frog into cold water then heat it slowly, it will stay until it is dead and cooked. We are being treated like frogs on the menu...