NationStates Jolt Archive

Sorry to give such a vague title, as I intend to bring attention to two parts of the ID card situation. I'm listening to the news right now, and I hear the gov't plans to sell ID cards to those without passports for £30, but to everyone else for £90. (note the report was on a couple of minutes ago and my short attention span is eating my memory so innacuracies may be present)


However, the phrasing the reporter used was rather odd. "It will cost £30 to join the scheme."

What scheme? this is a forced purchase! It seems odd that it's being described as a scheme, like a supermarket loyalty card... but yet the price is mandatory. Not only that, it's hugely expensive. And about half the country doesn't want it! I have no doubt that it's wrong to try and force this through, especially for the price. so my questions are as follows.


Do you think the cost for the ID card *which will fill most purposes, including benefit collection card, etc.* is reasonable?

Do you support the bringing in of an ID card?

Personally, I feel that the price is over the top, it's ridiculous, and I don't believe it can cost that much. I also believe that if I don't want it, I shouldn't have to pay for it. However, the socialist in me also believes that if the majority wants it, and it doesn't totally contradict my beliefs, that I should accept it whilst I try and have it removed. The thing is, though. The majority clearly doesn't want it. it's nearly a 50/50 split.


Opinions, anyone?

I'm against it. I think it would be far too expensive for something that we're forced to have. It would be a load more bearucracy and form-filling for everyone and it would cost loads of our taxes, in spite of the amount we'll be paying for the fee. It won't do anything to stop terrorism, it's our lax immigration policies that cause it.

I think that in some ways it is neccessary, but support to buy it should be provided for a certain income bracket, or unemployed, disabled etc.

But Im sure theyve thought of that.

I'll refuse to buy one. I don't agree with them and I certainly don't agree with being forced to buy them.

Well, all i think is, I dont care, I havent got anything to hide.

Well, all i think is, I dont care, I havent got anything to hide.
In that case would you consent to a CCTV camera being installed in your bedroom? After all, if you haven't got anything to hide then what's there to worry about?

Well, an ID card doent exactly do that does it?

Well, an ID card doent exactly do that does it?
You're missing the point. It's the same principle. If you say "If you've done nothing wrong then you have nothing to worry about", then that can be used by a government as a justification for any invasion of privacy. These privacy violations could go far beyond ID cards, and to its furthest logical conclusion, to the CCTV analogy I gave. Privacy should be an absolute right, a right you should be able to excercise without any justification.

I suppose thats true. But, you can't use that justification for opposing all socially un-conservative measures.

And *I hate saying this* Sometimes you have to have a little faith in your government, that they are doing what is right. However, dont stop questioning it, just sont assume its completely sinister.

I suppose thats true. But, you can't use that justification for opposing all socially un-conservative measures.

And *I hate saying this* Sometimes you have to have a little faith in your government, that they are doing what is right. However, dont stop questioning it, just sont assume its completely sinister.
I bet the German people in the 1930s thought that you should trust your government. Politicians have only their own interests at heart, they couldn't give a shit what happens to you and me. They can never be trusted.

It's mandatory? Wow, that's orwellian. We got new ones here a few weeks ago, but no one is forced to buy them. I have my passport and drivers licence - those'll do.

You're missing the point. It's the same principle. If you say "If you've done nothing wrong then you have nothing to worry about", then that can be used by a government as a justification for any invasion of privacy. These privacy violations could go far beyond ID cards, and to its furthest logical conclusion, to the CCTV analogy I gave. Privacy should be an absolute right, a right you should be able to excercise without any justification.


One might have said the same thing about having to have your drivers licence on your person whilst driving. 'How dare you invade my right to privacy, whether i have my identification on me at this time!' etc etc.

Its a security issue. If you've nothing to hide then whats your problem?

Its not like you have any privacy issues anyway- there is one CCTV camera for every two Britons anyway! :p

I bet the German people in the 1930s thought that you should trust your government. Politicians have only their own interests at heart, they couldn't give a shit what happens to you and me. They can never be trusted.

And thats why I said question things, I also said 'I hate saying this', but you cant ever get anything done by thinking that the people running the country are b*****ds. Ever wondered why the liberals are'nt in power, or why the conservatives lost in 2001 and 2005? because they have no constructive policies.

All they (could, this is changing) say was , 'The government is wrong'.

People should do what they did with the community charge and just refuse to participate. The government had to back down eventually. I wonder if people still have the gonads though.

I'm strongly against ID cards.
Not only are we being FORCED to buy into something we don't even want and a lot of people do not support, it's a bad and expensive idea. Knowing Labour, we'll probably end up with a terrible computer system for the cards which will keep crashing and re-crashing - in other words, a big stinking waste of taxpayer funding. Plus, it's a SEVERE intrusion of privacy in my opinion. I don't believe in the saying "If you've got nothing to hide, why are you worried?". This is yet another reason why I am worried for my privacy by my government

I'm strongly against ID cards.
Not only are we being FORCED to buy into something we don't even want and a lot of people do not support, it's a bad and expensive idea. Knowing Labour, we'll probably end up with a terrible computer system for the cards which will keep crashing and re-crashing - in other words, a big stinking waste of taxpayer funding. Plus, it's a SEVERE intrusion of privacy in my opinion. I don't believe in the saying "If you've got nothing to hide, why are you worried?". This is yet another reason why I am worried for my privacy by my government

In all honesty, they white Anglo-Saxon population of Britain has very little to worry about- THEY aren't going to be stopped and searched, asked for their id.

On a night out- a doorman asks you for your id, you refuse on the grounds that 'its an invasion of my privacy!! grr...'.. he'll refuse you entry. You can't complain, thats policy. Likewise on a national level.

Now, i believe (not a British citizen by the by) there should be a referendum to decide if the public backs it or not- if it does, end of story. If not, likewise.

Im probably going to get angry replies for this. I genui9nely believe that the government is doing this to help protect us from terrorisim and organised crime.

Im probably going to get angry replies for this. I genui9nely believe that the government is doing this to help protect us from terrorisim and organised crime.

You are so naïve.

What could they possibly do with an ID card? I bet Tescos has more information on a lot of people than the government

What could they possibly do with an ID card? I bet Tescos has more information on a lot of people than the government

"Ihre Papieren, bitte. Mach schnell!"

What could they possibly do with an ID card? I bet Tescos has more information on a lot of people than the government
Tesco tracks the shopping habits of every single person who has entered a store IIRC, and then sells the information to advertisers etc, and uses it to target you with ads and stuff.

Still, the government can fuck right off if they think I'm paying for an ID card. In fact, even if it was free they could fuck off.

"Ihre Papieren, bitte. Mach schnell!"

lol...uhhh, I think.

Google translator is the best i can do to unde3rstand that.

Im probably going to get angry replies for this. I genui9nely believe that the government is doing this to help protect us from terrorisim and organised crime.
How will this prevent terrorism? Terrorists will always be a problem as long as this government is so lax on immigration. The terrorists are already here because the government let them in. Same goes for organised crime, how will an ID prevent these crimes, especially when they won't even require them to be carried around.

Im probably going to get angry replies for this. I genui9nely believe that the government is doing this to help protect us from terrorisim and organised crime.
How?

Anybody seriously in terrorism or organised crime will get fakes, or will find a way around it. It's just the general public who is going to be 'punished', while those who are the real problem will get away scot free, as usual.

The whole point of a 'databse' is that the fakes won't be on the database.

"Papers, please..."

In my opinion, this is totally horrifying. Do the people of Britain want ID cards? No. And what's worse, it's cumpolsory. Forget the crap that the government says about a voluntary scheme: you have to have one when you get a passport. And the cost will be astronomical.

How will this prevent terrorism? Terrorists will always be a problem as long as this government is so lax on immigration. The terrorists are already here because the government let them in. Same goes for organised crime, how will an ID prevent these crimes, especially when they won't even require them to be carried around.

Well, the terrorists that struck on 7/7 were British. However, even Clarke admits that it would have still happened with ID cards. Therefore, one has to admit that if the government doesn't think it'll help the fight against terror, why do they really want it?

How will this prevent terrorism? Terrorists will always be a problem as long as this government is so lax on immigration. The terrorists are already here because the government let them in. Same goes for organised crime, how will an ID prevent these crimes, especially when they won't even require them to be carried around.

I dont think I'll justify that with an answer.

"Papers, please..."

In my opinion, this is totally horrifying.

Jesus... you go out much? Thats all i hear on a night out. -"Sorry bud, ya ain't comin' in without id"-

While doubtful it will affect terrorism or organised crime at all- i really don't see the fuss- where i'm from everyone i know has state approved ID, even for their own piece of mind.

Well, the terrorists that struck on 7/7 were British.
Yeah, but they were all muslims and descendents of immigrants. If we never let these people in the country in the first place then islamic terrorism wouldn't be nearly as much as a problem as it is now. Perhaps we would possibly have a problem with terrorists from abroad, but they're much easier to deal with than the enemy within.

Yeah, but they were all muslims and descendents of immigrants. If we never let these people in the country in the first place then islamic terrorism wouldn't be nearly as much as a problem as it is now. Perhaps we would possibly have a problem with terrorists from abroad, but they're much easier to deal with than the enemy within.

Shame... if only this line of thought was in mind when your country was trying to rule half the planet.....

Shame... if only this line of thought was in mind when your country was trying to rule half the planet.....
I wasn't even alive then, so don't lay all this empire guilt trip crap on me. Why should the current generation be punished for the mistakes of previous generations?

I wasn't even alive then, so don't lay all this empire guilt trip crap on me. Why should the current generation be punished for the mistakes of previous generations?

Don't take it to heart ;) I was only saying if that train of thought was in their minds while trying to take over half the planet- there mightn't be this sutuation. :)

Why should innocent immigrants be alienated for the actions of those who only have the same colour skin as them? Are they meant to apologise for the actions of those who have no link to the innocent? :(

ID cards won't solve terrorism- has nothing to do with it. ID cards wouldn't have stopped Tim McVeigh :(

ID cards won't solve terrorism- has nothing to do with it.
Yes, but the British government has a nasty habit of doing stuff that will be entirely ineffective. Like internment without trial. Did it work in Northern Ireland? Nope. Has it worked on the mainland? Nope.

This does seem to be a pretty pointless measure if it's meant to stop terrorism.the terrorists could easily go out and get the id,just like everyone olse in the country.
Chances are it'll mainly be the people who look middle eastern that will get asked for id.if anything this is just going to get the terrorists to start recruiting europeans or asians,which im suprised they havent already done.

Yeah, but they were all muslims and descendents of immigrants. If we never let these people in the country in the first place then islamic terrorism wouldn't be nearly as much as a problem as it is now. Perhaps we would possibly have a problem with terrorists from abroad, but they're much easier to deal with than the enemy within.

It is Britains afult for allowing these men to grow up in ghettos of poverty. The average unemplotment rate among young british muslims is 20%. If the government did something about that, they probably wouldnt have got sucked into terrorisim.

And what do you say to hardworking immigrants form other countries who just want a job. 'Sorry, your descendants might be terrorists or criminals'.

Yeah, but they were all muslims and descendents of immigrants. If we never let these people in the country in the first place then islamic terrorism wouldn't be nearly as much as a problem as it is now. Perhaps we would possibly have a problem with terrorists from abroad, but they're much easier to deal with than the enemy within.

This reminds me of a tommy tiernan joke.'The English took over half the world,and then complain when those people follow them home'
funny man

This reminds me of a tommy tiernan joke.'The English took over half the world,and then complain when those people follow them home'
funny man

lol:D

This reminds me of a tommy tiernan joke.'The English took over half the world,and then complain when those people follow them home'
funny man
I don't remember taking over half the world. Might have something to do with the minor point that I wasn't even alive. As I said before, why should current generations be punished for past mistakes?

I don't remember taking over half the world. Might have something to do with the minor point that I wasn't even alive. As I said before, why should current generations be punished for past mistakes?

That's because you didnt take over half the world.the british empire did,and you are in no way related to it.well chances are you're descended from some of its citizens,but thats it.
You arent being punished,saying you're being punished implies an intelligence behind the situation.you are living with the consequences of the actions of a past generation,as are all people.

That's because you didnt take over half the world.the british empire did,and you are in no way related to it.well chances are you're descended from some of its citizens,but thats it.
You arent being punished,saying you're being punished implies an intelligence behind the situation.you are living with the consequences of the actions of a past generation,as are all people.
We are being punished because these consequences needn't happen. They only happen because the government makes it happen. The flow of migrants can always be stopped if the political will is there. Yes, we may be living with the consequences of the past, but the government should be trying to prevent the negative consequences of the past from reaching the current generation. In this case it could easily be achieved by stopping immigration.

Im sorry, but the stricter immigration regulations are , the more monry goes to awful people-trafickers and organised crime gangs.

Also, like it or not, Britain needs more immigrants, unless morr British people have more children and get tertiary education, and even this will take 15 years or more to have an effect.

Perhaps I should make a new thread on immigration in the UK?

The whole point of a 'databse' is that the fakes won't be on the database.

This is one of the major issues i have with ID cards, ignoring the issuse of whether you can trust the government with the information

if you have a database, and cards to have a a secure system

you have to check the persons details against those on the card, to check that the card belongs to the person, and check those on the card with those in the database, to check the card is not a fake, as all that checking the card to the person tells you is that the data you checked matches it doesnt tell you anything else is reliable.

now if you are having to check both the card becomes irrelevent as you have to check against the database to have any security. As its quite likely that it will be a very short time before cards can be faked.

a issue is everyone will assume these things are 100% secure and reliable, which they won't be, so if anyone manages to sucessfuly duplicate one they have a almost perfect form of identity theft and you would have real problems proving that someone wasn`t you.

as anyone with knowledge of how to improve reliability its can only realy be done effectivly with redundancy not by putting everything into one "MAGIC" do everything card, as if that one thing fails you have nothing to fall back on.

There is also the issue of how the cards are actually supposed to help with terrorism, as far as i can see unless you are going to check everyone the chance of checking the right person and identifying them is no better than without them, and thats ignoring issues with fakes, as there are plenty of ways of avoiding checks untill its too late for it to help.

now i may have my logic wrong but from what ive seen the whole problem appears to be approached from the wrong direction, again

the problem is, they could only help stop terrorism if you were always asked for them. You won't know if they're suspicious unless they have a card... and they don't know if you have a card if they don't ask. As such, there'd be a lot more officers on the streets, and even less solving crime. Sounds like win/win.

Compulsory ID cards, and compulsory carrying of ID cards are totally different things, no?

Compulsory ID cards, and compulsory carrying of ID cards are totally different things, no?

I'm not sure, what with the detention without trial law.

Don't have your card? "Come with us, til we -clear things up-."

See?

Sorry to give such a vague title, as I intend to bring attention to two parts of the ID card situation. I'm listening to the news right now, and I hear the gov't plans to sell ID cards to those without passports for £30, but to everyone else for £90. (note the report was on a couple of minutes ago and my short attention span is eating my memory so innacuracies may be present)

More than that, the LSE recently published £300 as the figure, and dispite Clarke objecting to it, the passport office also came to the same figure. I'll have a google around for the source, but it was in Private Eye a while back. And to the best of my knowledge PE don't keep an online archive.

:EDIT: Source (you'll need to scroll down a bit) (http://www.no2id.net/news/newsletters/newsletter.php?issue=23)

The LSE's costings for the scheme came under fire from both the Prime Minister and the Home Secretary who described the £300 card cost as "simply mad". However Private Eye on the 24th June reported that word from within the UK Passport agency "is that their own projections show the cost of ID cards to be, er, £300 per card."

Opinions, anyone?

Yep, plenty :D


On a night out- a doorman asks you for your id, you refuse on the grounds that 'its an invasion of my privacy!! grr...'.. he'll refuse you entry. You can't complain, thats policy. Likewise on a national level.

That's slightly different and you know it. Bars aren't aloud to sell to those underage or they run the risk of having their license revoked. ID is required if you look young (hence the many signs that say "If you look under 21 don't be offended if we ask for ID to make sure you are over 18").

Also, due to the compulsory nature of these ID cards, the government is basically requiring you have licence for being over 18. (Or maybe 16, cannot remember at what age one will have to get one at.)

Im probably going to get angry replies for this. I genui9nely believe that the government is doing this to help protect us from terrorisim and organised crime.

Absurd. On the Today program roughly one year ago, Blunkett stated that ID cards would have a minimul effect on terrorism and organised crime.

Terrorists are frequently British born or legally in the country. Also they tend to be the most law abiding citizens around, lest they get arrested for the most minor of trangressions and their plan found out prematurely. ID cards would be useless.

:EDIT:


Yeah, but they were all muslims and descendents of immigrants. If we never let these people in the country in the first place then islamic terrorism wouldn't be nearly as much as a problem as it is now. Perhaps we would possibly have a problem with terrorists from abroad, but they're much easier to deal with than the enemy within.

The fact that I find this an odious point of view (I myself am a descendent of immigrant), it is also off topic.


Compulsory ID cards, and compulsory carrying of ID cards are totally different things, no?

It will also be compulsory to carry them at all times.



:EDIT: This FAQ also makes interesting reading:

http://www.privacyinternational.org/issues/idcard/uk/uk-idcard-faq.html

I also think it is important to point out that any government program that heavily relies on technology have always run over budget and haven't worked properly.