My Mobile Life

The government should limit the data it collects on citizens for its ID card scheme to avoid creating a surveillance society, a group of MPs has warned.

The home affairs select committee called for proper safeguards on the plans for compulsory ID cards to stop "function creep" threatening privacy.

It wants a guarantee the scheme will not be expanded without MPs' approval.

The Ministry of Justice said it had to balance protecting the public with protecting a right to privacy.

The Home Secretary Jacqui Smith told BBC One's Andrew Marr Show that many people welcomed the use of devices such as CCTV cameras.

"I know that when as it was then, the Labour-controlled council in my constituency, funded CCTV cameras in the town centre to help to protect people when they wanted to go out and have a night out without being blighted by anti-social behaviour, people supported it.

"So I know for example with the DNA database that tens of thousands of crimes have been solved because of the use of the DNA database."

The National Identity Scheme is due to start rolling out later this year, and will eventually hold details on everyone in Britain over the age of 16.

The select committee said in a report: "It should collect only what is essential, to be stored only for as long as is necessary.

"We are concerned... about the potential for 'function creep' in terms of the surveillance potential of the national identity scheme.

"Any ambiguity about the objectives of the scheme puts in jeopardy the public's trust in the scheme itself and in the government's ability to run it."

The committee said it accepted the government's assurance that the scheme would not be used as a surveillance tool.

However, "we seek the further assurance that any initiative to broaden the scope of the scheme will only be proposed after consulting the information commissioner and on the basis that proposals will be subject to parliamentary scrutiny in draft form," it said.

Committee chairman Keith Vaz said there could be "potentially disastrous consequences" if data was mishandled. Therefore, he said, the government should draw up a "broad outline of contingency plans" to deal with potential security breaches in the ID cards programme.

The report referred to the loss of two discs containing the personal details of 25m people last year.

"The minister's assurances that the government has learned lessons, though welcome, are not sufficient to reassure us or, we suspect, the public," it said.

The report also urged the government to set up new controls on the National DNA Database to prevent "unnecessary invasions of privacy".

It said the system should be changed to make it easier for people whose DNA is on the system to challenge its retention.

Mr Vaz said: "What we are calling for is an overall principle of 'least data, for least time'.

Information Commissioner Richard Thomas said he welcomed the report.

"It is essential that positive action is taken to ensure the potential risks of a surveillance society never manifest themselves in this country," Mr Thomas said.

"Every possible step must be taken to ensure public trust in the way that personal information is collected and stored."

The report also called for a public consultation on the powers of public bodies, such as councils, to use surveillance powers.

In April, there was widespread criticism when it emerged that Poole Borough Council had carried out surveillance on a family accused of cheating the school catchment system.

The chairman of the Local Government Association, Sir Simon Milton, said he understood there were concerns over the use of surveillance.

"We are working with the government, police chiefs and the surveillance commissioners to clarify some of the details of the legislation and make sure it is clear when and how surveillance should be used," Sir Simon said.

A Ministry of Justice spokesman said: "The government takes the protection of personal data extremely seriously and is committed to ensuring that information is shared in a safe and secure way.

"It is necessary to find a balance between protecting the public and protecting a right to privacy.

"Data sharing is not only essential to delivering public service but also has an important role to play in tackling potential criminal activities."

The government said it would respond fully to the report in due course.

Have added some pictures of the recent McCartney gig at Anfield Stadium to celebrate Liverpool's year as the Capital of European Culture. It really was a fantastic night. Liverpool rocked, and so did McCartney.. Just a shame I was too far away to get some decent shots, however, the atmosphere of that night will live on in my memory for a long time to come....

The US and the four largest economies in Asia are to voice "serious concerns" over "unprecedented" oil prices.

Energy ministers are meeting in Japan a day after a record one-day jump in the crude oil price, to $139 a barrel.

Under pressure from the US, Japan, China, India and South Korea have agreed on the need to end fuel subsidies, blamed for boosting demand.

But correspondents say there are major differences over the speed and extent to which the changes should be made.

The soaring cost of oil is causing growing strain to economies around the world, with some governments facing protests and other pressures from consumers and businesses.

Both the Indian and Malaysian governments have recently raised fuel prices in order to cut the subsidies they provide.

Officials and ministers from the Group of Eight (G8) key industrialised nations, as well as China, India and South Korea, are meeting for two days in the northern city of Aomori.

In a statement to be issued after the talks, the US and Asian countries are expected to say rising oil prices pose a great burden, especially on developing countries and are "against the interest of both consuming and producing countries", news agencies reported.

It will also say that "phased and gradual" withdrawal of price subsidies - blamed by some for fuelling demand in emerging economies - is "desirable", the French news agency AFP said.

But India insisted there was no agreement to remove the subsidies altogether, China made clear it had no time frame for moving towards lower subsidies, and Japan's trade minister confirmed they had agreed only on the need to remove the subsidies, according to the BBC's Chris Hogg, in Tokyo.

Fund another Green Revolution – or people will starve. That's the message from heads of several international farm research institutes galvanised by the food price crisis.

Scientists who run three of the world's leading international agricultural research labs say the worldwide surge in food prices is a predictable result of the neglect of agricultural research over the past two decades. They say the only way to prevent further price hikes, starvation and political instability is to fund more research into increased crop yields.

World food prices have been rising since 2000, but this sped up slightly in 2007, then sharply in early 2008. High prices have hit the urban poor especially hard, and led to food shortages, riots and demonstrations worldwide.

"We don't see this as a surprise," says Bob Zeigler, head of the International Rice Research Institute (IRRI) in Los Baños in the Philippines. "We've seen this coming for years. Basically, we're victims of our own success."

IRRI is part of the Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research, a network of international agricultural research institutes started in the 1960s. CGIAR largely brought about the "Green Revolution" of high-yield crops that ended famine in much of the developing world. Zeigler and the heads of two other CGIAR institutes spoke to journalists on Tuesday about the crisis.

As a result of the Green Revolution, Zeigler says, "food prices fell, and governments thought they would stay that way forever, and our problems with food supply were over." During the 1990s funding for research aimed at maintaining and increasing crop yields fell steeply, he adds.

But demand for food kept rising, with growing world population and prosperity. For a while the grain mountains could cope with demand and prices stayed low, says Joachim von Braun, head of the International Food Policy Research Institute in Washington DC. But since 2000 stocks have plummeted, and prices are rising as a result.

Meanwhile, growth in yields of grain per hectare of farmland, which climbed steadily throughout the 1970s and 1980s, have slowed, until wheat and maize yields are now rising at only 1-2% per year – and in some places rice yields are steady or are even falling.

"That is just too low to meet increasing demand," says Zeigler. "That's why we're eating more than we're producing."

The resulting increase in food prices was purely a product of supply and demand until the end of 2007, says von Braun. Then price rises caused "hysteria", panic buying and speculation, causing rice to soar from $300 a ton in December 2007 to more than $1000 this week.

Meat and dairy prices have also risen, but this needn't be all bad news, says Carlos Sere, head of the International Livestock Research Institute in Nairobi, Kenya. Smallholders who feed their animals crop residue and forage rather than grain can take advantage of the price increases to boost their income and raise themselves out of poverty. But those farmers also need research and better technology to keep their animals healthy and to feed them efficiently.

Government subsidies for biofuels have added to recent price rises. Von Braun wants a moratorium on biofuels made using food such as maize and oilseeds, and says countries should stop adding to market instability with policies that discourage food trade.

"Most of all we need to invest in science and technology, and in measures that improve small farmers' access to markets," he says. "We need yield increases of 3-5 per cent per year for the next 15-20 years."

Zeigler points to IRRI research to improve fertiliser management and limit post-harvest losses that is "ready to go" but is not being used because countries have cut back on services that gets new technology to farmers. In other areas, he says, "we don't have the knowledge on the shelf now to deliver the yield increases we need."

So is it the dawn of a new age in medical advancement or have scientists finally gone too far? Personally, this sits very uneasy with me. I can certainly see the benefits that it could bring, especially to the millions of people around the world affected by Parkinson's and Alzhiemers. But now approval has been given, how far will it go? How long before the scientists appeal to grow an embryo full term to study the changes that take place. The answers they will find through growing an embryo for a few days, will also lead to more questions and an intense desire to study further. Man is, after all, an insatiable beast. And if approval is given for further study. How long before nature turns on us? We may hold the key to our future survival, but it may also turn out to be Pandora's Box!

----------------------------------------------------

The fertility regulator has agreed in principle that British scientists should be able to create human-animal embryos.

The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) agreed to the controversial proposal, which scientists say will pave the way for therapies for diseases such as Alzheimer's and Parkinson's.

The positive decision from the HFEA means applications from scientists at King's College London and Newcastle University can now be appraised by a licence committee, probably in November.

A consultation paper published by the HFEA earlier this week showed that the public was mostly "at ease" with the proposals once the full research implications had been explained.

Researchers want to create hybrid embryos known as cytoplasmic embryos by merging human cells with animal eggs.

In May, the Government published the Human Tissue and Embryos Bill, which proposed a regulation-making power that could lead to the creation of cytoplasmic embryos.

Such embryos are more than 99% human, with an animal component representing around 0.1%. The embryos are made using eggs from rabbits or cows and genetic material from human donors.

Scientists say they could provide them with a plentiful supply of stem cells for studies into new treatments.

The research involves transferring nuclei containing DNA from human cells, such as skin cells, to animal eggs that have had almost all their genetic information removed.

Some religious and pro-life groups have objected to the proposals. Some opposed mixing human and animal material on ethical grounds while others disagree with creating embryos that are destined to be destroyed.