Labour Government Pushing Through Spending Against Civil Servants Advice

lostinrates

StevieJ wrote: »

I am not really well up on ID cards but what is the difference in having one of them as opposed to a passport? apart from the obvious about a passport that you don't need one if you don't go abroard

I think the presumed inevitable end is that one is mandated to always carry the id, where as one is neither required to carry nor apply for a passport or currently to carry any form of ID.

when I have lived n places where carrying ID is required there does come a sort of milld paranoia. e.g.: on the beach.....you can't leave your id in case its stolen....you can't swim with it....theft becomes a bigger issue than it currently is. Even simple thngs, like now, I can nip ut for a dog walk without carrying a hand bag or making sure I've got pockets if there is someone at home, as I don't NEED to carry anything. Its all surmountable, but mildly inconvenient.

I guess the serious anti's have more fuel than that.

TBH, I mind more the cost, and the pressure on the teeny weeny little bags we women carry to evening dos.

ninky_2

A._Badger wrote: »

It is the State's business to serve the citizen - not vice versa, though I do realise that is an unpopular point of view among many socialists.

and id cards would help the state to do this. serious organised crime is a major issue - mass benefit fraud, people trafficking, identity theft, terrorism etc etc. id cards would help fight these things.

ninky_2

A._Badger wrote: »

The Kings Cross bombers would have been fully entitled to that nice Mr Straw's identity cards - as would many other of the cuddly terrorists imported by our mercifully just turfed-out government.

the king's cross bombers were not imported by the goverment. nor was the london nail bomber. they were home grown. no one is saying identity cards would have stopped these crimes. although possibly if you had to show them before bulk buying ammonia or similar it might help.

there are lots of crimes happening which id cards would stop though.

angrypirate

ninky wrote: »

not really. i was merely pointing out that NOT having id cards that have not actually been brought in yet is hardly a policy.

the equivalent would be the labour party saying a major new policy is NOT have marriage tax breaks.

cleggeron have so far presented a very negative approach, slagging off the old party, saying things they are not going to spend money on and things they are not going to do.

where are the new ideas?

Surely the new idea is not spending more than you can afford? Labour effectively MEWed this country

Mary_Hartnell

ninky wrote: »

i'm neither libertarian nor authoritarian. however i find it worrying that people are happier for private companies to have more details on them than the government. tesco clubcard is more high surveillance than id cards ever would be. as is every credit card or debit card you own.

i don't see the problem with id cards myself. we've long passed my idea of a 'free' society where you can just pick any bit of land, make a home for yourself and have free access to come and go around the world as you please. having your details on an id card is small fry.

So you really don't think that every turned on mobile phone in this country is not monitored, let alone the credit cards and store cards?

Just check out the evidence given at any death trial.

A._Badger

ninky wrote: »

the king's cross bombers were not imported by the goverment. nor was the london nail bomber. they were home grown. no one is saying identity cards would have stopped these crimes. although possibly if you had to show them before bulk buying ammonia or similar it might help.

If you do not believe that the previous government's policies have increased the risk of Islamic terrorism, then you are even nuttier than I had thought. And if that's how you define 'home-grown' then you have confirmed it.

ninky wrote: »

there are lots of crimes happening which id cards would stop though.

Prove it. More to the point, justify it, even if it were true, against the loss of personal freedoms fought for and enjoyed by the citizens of this country for a thousand years.

A._Badger

Mary_Hartnell wrote: »

So you really don't think that every turned on mobile phone in this country is not monitored, let alone the credit cards and store cards?

Just check out the evidence given at any death trial.

And not just mobile phone calls, as anyone with even a peripheral knowledge of IT and security will realise.

kabayiri

Mary_Hartnell wrote: »

So you really don't think that every turned on mobile phone in this country is not monitored, let alone the credit cards and store cards?

Just check out the evidence given at any death trial.

I know phone / internet / mesh-level monitoring is not tracked fully yet...that is the jurisdiction of a project called MTI. A project which is incidentally potentially as costly as ID cards.

To monitor internet level traffic at even near real time across every mobile/fixed device is a very big deal to implement.

vivatifosi

A._Badger wrote: »

Prove it. More to the point, justify it, even if it were true, against the loss of personal freedoms fought for and enjoyed by the citizens of this country for a thousand years.

That to me is the key issue. They fought for them knowing how governments that weren't benign behaved towards their citizens. It is one thing to have a cell phone tapped or my internet monitored, but quite another to have my DNA and fingerprints on file and to have to carry around proof of who I am.

Its all very well that we've a history of democracy. There's no guarantee that benign government is the absolute future, so why hand over so much of your identity willingly?