Any relationship between Davey's conference vote on changing opposition to ID cards and today's announcement from the governement, do we reckon? In no direction, either direction, or both?
Absolutely shameful that a liberal party could get behind this IMHO.
According to Luke Tryl it's 54 to 18% in favour. What's more two of the main Parties big thinkers Tony Blair and William Hague are supporters so that's good enough for me
The devil will be in the detail. But IMO it's very difficult, of not impossible, to alter the detail so that it is beneficial to the public and individuals. And very easy to have the details to be far from benficial.
Do you trust this government - any government - to get the details right?
They have them in nearly every country in Europe and as I've worked in just about all of them I'm quite jealous. Showing and leaving your passport at hotels then forgetting to pick it up drives me mad particularly when I'm dashing around and the clientas are picking up the bills for me. As for security it really doesn't bother me, I don't think I've got anything worthwhile to hide
Any relationship between Davey's conference vote on changing opposition to ID cards and today's announcement from the governement, do we reckon? In no direction, either direction, or both?
Absolutely shameful that a liberal party could get behind this IMHO.
According to Luke Tryl it's 54 to 18% in favour. What's more two of the main Parties big thinkers Tony Blair and William Hague are supporters so that's good enough for me
The devil will be in the detail. But IMO it's very difficult, of not impossible, to alter the detail so that it is beneficial to the public and individuals. And very easy to have the details to be far from benficial.
Do you trust this government - any government - to get the details right?
The UK government has just gone ahead with the Online Safety Act which essentially says "give your personal data to anyone who asks in order to prove your age" in a complete about-turn on 20 years of warning people not to share personal data with everyone on the net. They didn't wait for fancy biometric verified mDOC zero-knowledge proof of age systems, they went for the worst possible options for privacy and security.
I'll be amazed if the Digital ID is well thought out.
Am I the only one to notice that since we made it harder to access porn people dealt with their 'frustration' by protesting outside hotels.
It would be a fair criticism of me that I get a lot of my opinions from The Spectator, because it's really the one bit of the media I read the most. And I think the first thing I read about a topic, if it reads convincingly, usually becomes my opinion till something else comes along.
So I am now officially against Northern Powerhouse Rail. I was all for it, till I read this fairly damning account of it, which is basically that it's not going to do anything for the North, because it's basically more of the HS2 project, just gussied up by Obsborne to look like his own genius levelling up scheme.
Osborne did that a lot. The OBR for example was meant to be a great way to ensure Tory style fiscal rectitude, but it wasn't - it was actually a quango designed to ready us for monetary union. Northern Powerhouse Rail sounds brilliant, but it turns out:
Called Northern Powerhouse Rail, this section alone will cost a claimed £17 billion (in reality, perhaps £30 billion). It will be a high-speed railway on which trains can never reach high speeds, because the stations are too close together. It will leave Manchester via a vastly expensive new eight-mile tunnel in the wrong direction – roughly south, only then turning west towards Liverpool, hence the longer journey time. The official reason for doing it like this is to serve Manchester Airport. But the ‘airport’ station would be almost a mile away from the airport. You’d have to transfer by bus.
So until another, better take comes along, I'm adopting Gilligan's view that NPR is shite and we should do a Queen Elizabeth line for Northern England instead. We're out of the EU now, we can do what the populace actually needs, not continue with their ludicrous grand projets and have to pretend they're working for people.
I'm surprised that's the criticism you think is the fairest. That you are a nasty racist piece of shit roughly on a par with the 'white baby' chancer would be my take. Maybe you havre to be of a particular mindset to both to read or write for that publication?
Is gratuitous, vulgar, foul-mouthed abuse of other posters now AOK again? I thought we were warned off that, coz it got a bit heated
But if pin-head, potty mouthed tragic retired tampon ad exec @Roger is allowed to say all this, then I presume it is OK for the rest of us?
I do hope so, because I LOVE handing out this stuff, particularly to a worthless shit stain of a human like, ooh, @Roger
No.
Today is not a day to piss me off.
You weren’t served pineapple pizza at lunch again, were you?
My youngest son dropped my iPhone 17 Pro Max which I only got on Tuesday and cracked the screen.
Still in working order but decided to sell it off cheap.
Below are the specs
13 year old British Male Speaks English Price negotiable
Think of it this way: what’s better than having one iPhone 17 Pro Max? Having two!
It's insured with Apple Care but the earliest slot I can get in Sheffield is next week, I am having to go to the Apple store in Edinburgh to get it fixed tomorrow.
There's no available slots for me nearby until the middle of next week.
You're going from Sheffield to Edinburgh..... just to get a phone fixed?!
The Apple Pro Max 17 must be bloody good!
Yes and yes.
Reality is that I've got a few things on this weekend and early next week (such as meeting JohnO and having lunch in Claridge's again) and I need my phone.
All my tickets, Uber bookings, etc are all on there.
It’s good that it’s not also your ID card, otherwise you wouldn’t be permitted to travel to Edinburgh!
Has Starmer misread the room again and all because his obsession with Farage ?
He doesn’t realise that the best thing he can do to help his party to fight back against Reform would be to stand down as leader.
Hah! Maybe. I think if Starmer were to go the Labour party have enough time and enough rope to hang themselves forever.
There's a bit of a race to the bottom with the established political parties. They all stopped being worthwhile some years ago. Quite why new political parties like Reform should choose to march into the same territory escapes me. Admittedly Corbyn and co are still trying to drag us off a cliff of stupidity. That's different, although very very boringly longstanding.
My objection to ID cards is not what the government that introduces them can do, per se (Labour are for the most part incompetent rather than malign, though they do have their moments).
Do you want to gift an ID database to every future government that takes power though? Some of them, particularly the way the world is going, may have much worse intentions.
It would be a fair criticism of me that I get a lot of my opinions from The Spectator, because it's really the one bit of the media I read the most. And I think the first thing I read about a topic, if it reads convincingly, usually becomes my opinion till something else comes along.
So I am now officially against Northern Powerhouse Rail. I was all for it, till I read this fairly damning account of it, which is basically that it's not going to do anything for the North, because it's basically more of the HS2 project, just gussied up by Obsborne to look like his own genius levelling up scheme.
Osborne did that a lot. The OBR for example was meant to be a great way to ensure Tory style fiscal rectitude, but it wasn't - it was actually a quango designed to ready us for monetary union. Northern Powerhouse Rail sounds brilliant, but it turns out:
Called Northern Powerhouse Rail, this section alone will cost a claimed £17 billion (in reality, perhaps £30 billion). It will be a high-speed railway on which trains can never reach high speeds, because the stations are too close together. It will leave Manchester via a vastly expensive new eight-mile tunnel in the wrong direction – roughly south, only then turning west towards Liverpool, hence the longer journey time. The official reason for doing it like this is to serve Manchester Airport. But the ‘airport’ station would be almost a mile away from the airport. You’d have to transfer by bus.
So until another, better take comes along, I'm adopting Gilligan's view that NPR is shite and we should do a Queen Elizabeth line for Northern England instead. We're out of the EU now, we can do what the populace actually needs, not continue with their ludicrous grand projets and have to pretend they're working for people.
I'm surprised that's the criticism you think is the fairest. That you are a nasty racist piece of shit roughly on a par with the 'white baby' chancer would be my take. Maybe you havre to be of a particular mindset to both to read or write for that publication?
Is gratuitous, vulgar, foul-mouthed abuse of other posters now AOK again? I thought we were warned off that, coz it got a bit heated
But if pin-head, potty mouthed tragic retired tampon ad exec @Roger is allowed to say all this, then I presume it is OK for the rest of us?
I do hope so, because I LOVE handing out this stuff, particularly to a worthless shit stain of a human like, ooh, @Roger
No.
Today is not a day to piss me off.
You weren’t served pineapple pizza at lunch again, were you?
My youngest son dropped my iPhone 17 Pro Max which I only got on Tuesday and cracked the screen.
Still in working order but decided to sell it off cheap.
Below are the specs
13 year old British Male Speaks English Price negotiable
Think of it this way: what’s better than having one iPhone 17 Pro Max? Having two!
It's insured with Apple Care but the earliest slot I can get in Sheffield is next week, I am having to go to the Apple store in Edinburgh to get it fixed tomorrow.
There's no available slots for me nearby until the middle of next week.
You're going from Sheffield to Edinburgh..... just to get a phone fixed?!
The Apple Pro Max 17 must be bloody good!
Yes and yes.
Reality is that I've got a few things on this weekend and early next week (such as meeting JohnO and having lunch in Claridge's again) and I need my phone.
All my tickets, Uber bookings, etc are all on there.
Didn't you just upgrade? Where's the old iphone? Just stick the sim in there.
Any relationship between Davey's conference vote on changing opposition to ID cards and today's announcement from the governement, do we reckon? In no direction, either direction, or both?
Absolutely shameful that a liberal party could get behind this IMHO.
According to Luke Tryl it's 54 to 18% in favour. What's more two of the main Parties big thinkers Tony Blair and William Hague are supporters so that's good enough for me
The devil will be in the detail. But IMO it's very difficult, of not impossible, to alter the detail so that it is beneficial to the public and individuals. And very easy to have the details to be far from benficial.
Do you trust this government - any government - to get the details right?
They have them in nearly every country in Europe and as I've worked in just about all of them I'm quite jealous. Showing and leaving your passport at hotels then forgetting to pick it up drives me mad particularly when I'm dashing around and the clientas are picking up the bills for me. As for security it really doesn't bother me, I don't think I've got anything worthwhile to hide
On the other hand, every other country in Europe hasn't just signed what appears to be a mad deal with a company linked to US techno-fascists, whose entire corporate raison d'etre appears to be the huge integration of information, and surveillance.
This reminds me of the issues last time ; the Home Office chose a scheme more comprehensive and intrusive than anything else operating in Europe, with the result that only the Thai government was interested in emulating it.
My objection to ID cards is not what the government that introduces them can do, per se (Labour are for the most part incompetent rather than malign, though they do have their moments).
Do you want to gift an ID database to every future government that takes power though? Some of them, particularly the way the world is going, may have much worse intentions.
It would be a fair criticism of me that I get a lot of my opinions from The Spectator, because it's really the one bit of the media I read the most. And I think the first thing I read about a topic, if it reads convincingly, usually becomes my opinion till something else comes along.
So I am now officially against Northern Powerhouse Rail. I was all for it, till I read this fairly damning account of it, which is basically that it's not going to do anything for the North, because it's basically more of the HS2 project, just gussied up by Obsborne to look like his own genius levelling up scheme.
Osborne did that a lot. The OBR for example was meant to be a great way to ensure Tory style fiscal rectitude, but it wasn't - it was actually a quango designed to ready us for monetary union. Northern Powerhouse Rail sounds brilliant, but it turns out:
Called Northern Powerhouse Rail, this section alone will cost a claimed £17 billion (in reality, perhaps £30 billion). It will be a high-speed railway on which trains can never reach high speeds, because the stations are too close together. It will leave Manchester via a vastly expensive new eight-mile tunnel in the wrong direction – roughly south, only then turning west towards Liverpool, hence the longer journey time. The official reason for doing it like this is to serve Manchester Airport. But the ‘airport’ station would be almost a mile away from the airport. You’d have to transfer by bus.
So until another, better take comes along, I'm adopting Gilligan's view that NPR is shite and we should do a Queen Elizabeth line for Northern England instead. We're out of the EU now, we can do what the populace actually needs, not continue with their ludicrous grand projets and have to pretend they're working for people.
I'm surprised that's the criticism you think is the fairest. That you are a nasty racist piece of shit roughly on a par with the 'white baby' chancer would be my take. Maybe you havre to be of a particular mindset to both to read or write for that publication?
Is gratuitous, vulgar, foul-mouthed abuse of other posters now AOK again? I thought we were warned off that, coz it got a bit heated
But if pin-head, potty mouthed tragic retired tampon ad exec @Roger is allowed to say all this, then I presume it is OK for the rest of us?
I do hope so, because I LOVE handing out this stuff, particularly to a worthless shit stain of a human like, ooh, @Roger
No.
Today is not a day to piss me off.
You weren’t served pineapple pizza at lunch again, were you?
My youngest son dropped my iPhone 17 Pro Max which I only got on Tuesday and cracked the screen.
Still in working order but decided to sell it off cheap.
Below are the specs
13 year old British Male Speaks English Price negotiable
Think of it this way: what’s better than having one iPhone 17 Pro Max? Having two!
It's insured with Apple Care but the earliest slot I can get in Sheffield is next week, I am having to go to the Apple store in Edinburgh to get it fixed tomorrow.
There's no available slots for me nearby until the middle of next week.
You're going from Sheffield to Edinburgh..... just to get a phone fixed?!
The Apple Pro Max 17 must be bloody good!
Yes and yes.
Reality is that I've got a few things on this weekend and early next week (such as meeting JohnO and having lunch in Claridge's again) and I need my phone.
All my tickets, Uber bookings, etc are all on there.
Didn't you just upgrade? Where's the old iphone? Just stick the sim in there.
My objection to ID cards is not what the government that introduces them can do, per se (Labour are for the most part incompetent rather than malign, though they do have their moments).
Do you want to gift an ID database to every future government that takes power though? Some of them, particularly the way the world is going, may have much worse intentions.
Or Musk or Putin? Probably the same thing.
Well exactly. We live in a world where data breaches happen with alarming regularity.
Imagine all that data falling into the hands of Putin or the CCP.
"Palantir was founded by Peter Thiel with backing from the CIA’s venture capital arm, In-Q-Tel, and was designed to revive the Total Information Awareness (TIA) program, a DARPA initiative aimed at comprehensive surveillance of Americans. TIA was supposedly discontinued due to privacy concerns, but Palantir effectively continued its programme."
Any relationship between Davey's conference vote on changing opposition to ID cards and today's announcement from the governement, do we reckon? In no direction, either direction, or both?
Absolutely shameful that a liberal party could get behind this IMHO.
According to Luke Tryl it's 54 to 18% in favour. What's more two of the main Parties big thinkers Tony Blair and William Hague are supporters so that's good enough for me
The devil will be in the detail. But IMO it's very difficult, of not impossible, to alter the detail so that it is beneficial to the public and individuals. And very easy to have the details to be far from benficial.
Do you trust this government - any government - to get the details right?
They have them in nearly every country in Europe and as I've worked in just about all of them I'm quite jealous. Showing and leaving your passport at hotels then forgetting to pick it up drives me mad particularly when I'm dashing around and the clientas are picking up the bills for me. As for security it really doesn't bother me, I don't think I've got anything worthwhile to hide
I travelled the world countless times, stayed in hundreds of hotels and accommodation, and never had to leave my passport at the hotel
As most all the opposition parties, including the Lib Dems oppose,,maybe you are on the losing side on this one
My objection to ID cards is not what the government that introduces them can do, per se (Labour are for the most part incompetent rather than malign, though they do have their moments).
Do you want to gift an ID database to every future government that takes power though? Some of them, particularly the way the world is going, may have much worse intentions.
What’s on this database that the government doesn’t already know? Honestly?
Any relationship between Davey's conference vote on changing opposition to ID cards and today's announcement from the governement, do we reckon? In no direction, either direction, or both?
Absolutely shameful that a liberal party could get behind this IMHO.
According to Luke Tryl it's 54 to 18% in favour. What's more two of the main Parties big thinkers Tony Blair and William Hague are supporters so that's good enough for me
The devil will be in the detail. But IMO it's very difficult, of not impossible, to alter the detail so that it is beneficial to the public and individuals. And very easy to have the details to be far from benficial.
Do you trust this government - any government - to get the details right?
They have them in nearly every country in Europe and as I've worked in just about all of them I'm quite jealous. Showing and leaving your passport at hotels then forgetting to pick it up drives me mad particularly when I'm dashing around and the clientas are picking up the bills for me. As for security it really doesn't bother me, I don't think I've got anything worthwhile to hide
I travelled the world countless times, stayed in hundreds of hotels and accommodation, and never had to leave my passport at the hotel
As most all the opposition parties, including the Lib Dems oppose,,maybe you are on the losing side on this one
My objection to ID cards is not what the government that introduces them can do, per se (Labour are for the most part incompetent rather than malign, though they do have their moments).
Do you want to gift an ID database to every future government that takes power though? Some of them, particularly the way the world is going, may have much worse intentions.
What’s on this database that the government doesn’t already know? Honestly?
If diverse types of nformation was the issue per se, governemts wouldn't employ companies like Palantir. One of their main functions is the integration of information on very large scales.
My objection to ID cards is not what the government that introduces them can do, per se (Labour are for the most part incompetent rather than malign, though they do have their moments).
Do you want to gift an ID database to every future government that takes power though? Some of them, particularly the way the world is going, may have much worse intentions.
What’s on this database that the government doesn’t already know? Honestly?
Why make it easier for them and malign actors by collating it in one place?
It would be a fair criticism of me that I get a lot of my opinions from The Spectator, because it's really the one bit of the media I read the most. And I think the first thing I read about a topic, if it reads convincingly, usually becomes my opinion till something else comes along.
So I am now officially against Northern Powerhouse Rail. I was all for it, till I read this fairly damning account of it, which is basically that it's not going to do anything for the North, because it's basically more of the HS2 project, just gussied up by Obsborne to look like his own genius levelling up scheme.
Osborne did that a lot. The OBR for example was meant to be a great way to ensure Tory style fiscal rectitude, but it wasn't - it was actually a quango designed to ready us for monetary union. Northern Powerhouse Rail sounds brilliant, but it turns out:
Called Northern Powerhouse Rail, this section alone will cost a claimed £17 billion (in reality, perhaps £30 billion). It will be a high-speed railway on which trains can never reach high speeds, because the stations are too close together. It will leave Manchester via a vastly expensive new eight-mile tunnel in the wrong direction – roughly south, only then turning west towards Liverpool, hence the longer journey time. The official reason for doing it like this is to serve Manchester Airport. But the ‘airport’ station would be almost a mile away from the airport. You’d have to transfer by bus.
So until another, better take comes along, I'm adopting Gilligan's view that NPR is shite and we should do a Queen Elizabeth line for Northern England instead. We're out of the EU now, we can do what the populace actually needs, not continue with their ludicrous grand projets and have to pretend they're working for people.
I'm surprised that's the criticism you think is the fairest. That you are a nasty racist piece of shit roughly on a par with the 'white baby' chancer would be my take. Maybe you havre to be of a particular mindset to both to read or write for that publication?
Is gratuitous, vulgar, foul-mouthed abuse of other posters now AOK again? I thought we were warned off that, coz it got a bit heated
But if pin-head, potty mouthed tragic retired tampon ad exec @Roger is allowed to say all this, then I presume it is OK for the rest of us?
I do hope so, because I LOVE handing out this stuff, particularly to a worthless shit stain of a human like, ooh, @Roger
No.
Today is not a day to piss me off.
You weren’t served pineapple pizza at lunch again, were you?
My youngest son dropped my iPhone 17 Pro Max which I only got on Tuesday and cracked the screen.
Still in working order but decided to sell it off cheap.
Below are the specs
13 year old British Male Speaks English Price negotiable
Think of it this way: what’s better than having one iPhone 17 Pro Max? Having two!
It's insured with Apple Care but the earliest slot I can get in Sheffield is next week, I am having to go to the Apple store in Edinburgh to get it fixed tomorrow.
There's no available slots for me nearby until the middle of next week.
You're going from Sheffield to Edinburgh..... just to get a phone fixed?!
The Apple Pro Max 17 must be bloody good!
Yes and yes.
Reality is that I've got a few things on this weekend and early next week (such as meeting JohnO and having lunch in Claridge's again) and I need my phone.
All my tickets, Uber bookings, etc are all on there.
Didn't you just upgrade? Where's the old iphone? Just stick the sim in there.
I traded it in with Apple yesterday.
Oh dear. Properly skewered.
Bit First World Problem mind. I got the brand new top of the range Orange iPhone yesterday and managed to crack the screen within minutes and now I can't find my appointment for oysters and fine wines at the Groucho.
My objection to ID cards is not what the government that introduces them can do, per se (Labour are for the most part incompetent rather than malign, though they do have their moments).
Do you want to gift an ID database to every future government that takes power though? Some of them, particularly the way the world is going, may have much worse intentions.
What’s on this database that the government doesn’t already know? Honestly?
If the amount of informatio was the issue per se, governemts wouldn't employ companies like Palantir. One of their main functions is the integration of information on very large scales.
Right. But if the government wanted to round us all up ID cards aren’t going to be the thing that allows it to happen
My objection to ID cards is not what the government that introduces them can do, per se (Labour are for the most part incompetent rather than malign, though they do have their moments).
Do you want to gift an ID database to every future government that takes power though? Some of them, particularly the way the world is going, may have much worse intentions.
What’s on this database that the government doesn’t already know? Honestly?
Why make it easier for them and malign actors by collating it in one place?
My objection to ID cards is not what the government that introduces them can do, per se (Labour are for the most part incompetent rather than malign, though they do have their moments).
Do you want to gift an ID database to every future government that takes power though? Some of them, particularly the way the world is going, may have much worse intentions.
What’s on this database that the government doesn’t already know? Honestly?
Why make it easier for them and malign actors by collating it in one place?
Because it makes no difference
It absolutely does. Why wouldn’t it? Hacking one definitive source of data on identity is much easier than trying to find it through multiple sources.
My objection to ID cards is not what the government that introduces them can do, per se (Labour are for the most part incompetent rather than malign, though they do have their moments).
Do you want to gift an ID database to every future government that takes power though? Some of them, particularly the way the world is going, may have much worse intentions.
What’s on this database that the government doesn’t already know? Honestly?
Why make it easier for them and malign actors by collating it in one place?
Because it makes no difference
It absolutely does. Why wouldn’t it? Hacking one definitive source of data on identity is much easier than trying to find it through multiple sources.
The government already has such databases. It’s already in one place. The only difference is an API
My objection to ID cards is not what the government that introduces them can do, per se (Labour are for the most part incompetent rather than malign, though they do have their moments).
Do you want to gift an ID database to every future government that takes power though? Some of them, particularly the way the world is going, may have much worse intentions.
What’s on this database that the government doesn’t already know? Honestly?
Why make it easier for them and malign actors by collating it in one place?
Because it makes no difference
It absolutely does. Why wouldn’t it? Hacking one definitive source of data on identity is much easier than trying to find it through multiple sources.
The government already has such databases. It’s already in one place. The only difference is an API
No, but on the current foolhardy plans, they could potentially give Peter Thiel, an anti-democratic billionaire and one of the most dangerous individuals in the world, a huge amount of information on UK citizens
Any relationship between Davey's conference vote on changing opposition to ID cards and today's announcement from the governement, do we reckon? In no direction, either direction, or both?
Absolutely shameful that a liberal party could get behind this IMHO.
According to Luke Tryl it's 54 to 18% in favour. What's more two of the main Parties big thinkers Tony Blair and William Hague are supporters so that's good enough for me
The devil will be in the detail. But IMO it's very difficult, of not impossible, to alter the detail so that it is beneficial to the public and individuals. And very easy to have the details to be far from benficial.
Do you trust this government - any government - to get the details right?
The UK government has just gone ahead with the Online Safety Act which essentially says "give your personal data to anyone who asks in order to prove your age" in a complete about-turn on 20 years of warning people not to share personal data with everyone on the net. They didn't wait for fancy biometric verified mDOC zero-knowledge proof of age systems, they went for the worst possible options for privacy and security.
I'll be amazed if the Digital ID is well thought out.
Whilst warning people not to share personal data on the net they have increasingly made in mandatory to share your passport, utility bills and bank statements with unregulated staff in order to have a bet.
Kemi against the proposal but not the principle necessarily. Calls for a proper national debate on cards and avoidance of burdens on law abiding citizens Bit half arsed
Apparently there's majority support from the voters from all parties including Reform and ALL Tory Home Secretaries from Hague onwards supported it. It seems Kemi is the one doing the misreading.
I do find some of the hysteria over ID cards rather strange given how much data the government already holds .
We happily have driving licences , passports etc . Once again No 10 comms have been useless .
You get out there , frame the debate before others do . Starmer should have had an evening news conference, laid out the plans and stressed it isn’t just about the boats .
My objection to ID cards is not what the government that introduces them can do, per se (Labour are for the most part incompetent rather than malign, though they do have their moments).
Do you want to gift an ID database to every future government that takes power though? Some of them, particularly the way the world is going, may have much worse intentions.
What’s on this database that the government doesn’t already know? Honestly?
Why make it easier for them and malign actors by collating it in one place?
Because it makes no difference
It absolutely does. Why wouldn’t it? Hacking one definitive source of data on identity is much easier than trying to find it through multiple sources.
The government already has such databases. It’s already in one place. The only difference is an API
I don’t understand the argument.
If you think the government already holds all the information it needs, then why do you need an additional ID card?
Either it has utility, or it doesn’t. If it doesn’t have utility because, as you claim, this data is already held, then it’s not needed. If it doesn’t, or the data needs to be held in a different way, then it increases risk.
My objection to ID cards is not what the government that introduces them can do, per se (Labour are for the most part incompetent rather than malign, though they do have their moments).
Do you want to gift an ID database to every future government that takes power though? Some of them, particularly the way the world is going, may have much worse intentions.
What’s on this database that the government doesn’t already know? Honestly?
Why make it easier for them and malign actors by collating it in one place?
Because it makes no difference
It absolutely does. Why wouldn’t it? Hacking one definitive source of data on identity is much easier than trying to find it through multiple sources.
The government already has such databases. It’s already in one place. The only difference is an API
No, but on the current foolhardy plans, they could potentially give Peter Thiel, an anti-democratic billionaire and one of the most dangerous people in the world, a huge amount of information on UK citizens
It'sJust madness, really.
I refuse to believe the likes of MI5 and GCHQ do not have such databases already. Almost everyone already gives the likes of Meta and Google more data than this almost every single day. It’s going to make no difference what’s so ever.
Presumably Labour are partly hoping that Reform oppose ID cards, so that they can say "Reform aren't serious about fighting illegal migration".
Yep. It gives them a talking point when discussing migration: "we have launched legislation for Digital ID to help identify and deport illegal migrants" etc.
In practice the consultation process will last 6 months, the legislation another 12, and implementation 2-3 years before the first digital card is issued.
Just in time for it to be scrapped by the next government before it becomes mandatory, I can only hope. Rinse and repeat of 20 years ago.
I do find some of the hysteria over ID cards rather strange given how much data the government already holds .
We happily have driving licences , passports etc . Once again No 10 comms have been useless .
You get out there , frame the debate before others do . Starmer should have had an evening news conference, laid out the plans and stressed it isn’t just about the boats .
I do find some of the hysteria over ID cards rather strange given how much data the government already holds .
We happily have driving licences , passports etc . Once again No 10 comms have been useless .
You get out there , frame the debate before others do . Starmer should have had an evening news conference, laid out the plans and stressed it isn’t just about the boats .
I'm conflicted about ID cards. Mostly because I believe both:
It is possible to have a good ID card system and we will fall behind other countries a little without one. Any system HMG implements will probably be rubbish, unsecure, intrusive, expensive and abandoned within the decade.
My objection to ID cards is not what the government that introduces them can do, per se (Labour are for the most part incompetent rather than malign, though they do have their moments).
Do you want to gift an ID database to every future government that takes power though? Some of them, particularly the way the world is going, may have much worse intentions.
What’s on this database that the government doesn’t already know? Honestly?
Why make it easier for them and malign actors by collating it in one place?
Because it makes no difference
It absolutely does. Why wouldn’t it? Hacking one definitive source of data on identity is much easier than trying to find it through multiple sources.
The government already has such databases. It’s already in one place. The only difference is an API
I don’t understand the argument.
If you think the government already holds all the information it needs, then why do you need an additional ID card?
Either it has utility, or it doesn’t. If it doesn’t have utility because, as you claim, this data is already held, then it’s not needed. If it doesn’t, or the data needs to be held in a different way, then it increases risk.
The difference is to allow us to use this data with each other, i.e to verify our citizenship status etc. That’s literally the point.
I do find some of the hysteria over ID cards rather strange given how much data the government already holds .
We happily have driving licences , passports etc . Once again No 10 comms have been useless .
You get out there , frame the debate before others do . Starmer should have had an evening news conference, laid out the plans and stressed it isn’t just about the boats .
If Labour wanted to introduce this, it should have said so in its manifesto. It’s a policy for which it should have obtained a democratic mandate, particularly because it has been proposed and scrapped before.
My objection to ID cards is not what the government that introduces them can do, per se (Labour are for the most part incompetent rather than malign, though they do have their moments).
Do you want to gift an ID database to every future government that takes power though? Some of them, particularly the way the world is going, may have much worse intentions.
What’s on this database that the government doesn’t already know? Honestly?
Why make it easier for them and malign actors by collating it in one place?
Because it makes no difference
It absolutely does. Why wouldn’t it? Hacking one definitive source of data on identity is much easier than trying to find it through multiple sources.
The government already has such databases. It’s already in one place. The only difference is an API
I don’t understand the argument.
If you think the government already holds all the information it needs, then why do you need an additional ID card?
Either it has utility, or it doesn’t. If it doesn’t have utility because, as you claim, this data is already held, then it’s not needed. If it doesn’t, or the data needs to be held in a different way, then it increases risk.
The difference is to allow us to use this data with each other, i.e to verify our citizenship status etc. That’s literally the point.
So it allows additional dissemination of data. So it increases risk.
I do find some of the hysteria over ID cards rather strange given how much data the government already holds .
We happily have driving licences , passports etc . Once again No 10 comms have been useless .
You get out there , frame the debate before others do . Starmer should have had an evening news conference, laid out the plans and stressed it isn’t just about the boats .
So because the situation is already rubbish we shouldn't mind it getting even more rubbish. Great argument.
I do find some of the hysteria over ID cards rather strange given how much data the government already holds .
We happily have driving licences , passports etc . Once again No 10 comms have been useless .
You get out there , frame the debate before others do . Starmer should have had an evening news conference, laid out the plans and stressed it isn’t just about the boats .
If Labour wanted to introduce this, it should have said so in its manifesto. It’s a policy for which it should have obtained a democratic mandate, particularly because it has been proposed and scrapped before.
Do you guys want to “stop the boats” or what? I would prefer we didn’t have compulsory ID cards but ultimately we need to do something different and this is one thing to try
Judging by the opposition across parliament to Starmer's ID cards he may well have difficulty passing it in the House
A gift to Burnham if he also comes out against
It's a clear sign of Starmer's political incompetence. He's just handed the other parties a big stick to beat Labour with all the way to the next election, for no immediate gain. ID cards are not popular and linking them to immigration isn't going to change that.
Labour look like they're failing around trying to find something, anything, that makes it look like they know how to fix immigration. But they've just done what they do rather too often now and reach for the big, clunking authoritarian hammer.
My objection to ID cards is not what the government that introduces them can do, per se (Labour are for the most part incompetent rather than malign, though they do have their moments).
Do you want to gift an ID database to every future government that takes power though? Some of them, particularly the way the world is going, may have much worse intentions.
What’s on this database that the government doesn’t already know? Honestly?
Why make it easier for them and malign actors by collating it in one place?
Because it makes no difference
It absolutely does. Why wouldn’t it? Hacking one definitive source of data on identity is much easier than trying to find it through multiple sources.
The government already has such databases. It’s already in one place. The only difference is an API
I don’t understand the argument.
If you think the government already holds all the information it needs, then why do you need an additional ID card?
Either it has utility, or it doesn’t. If it doesn’t have utility because, as you claim, this data is already held, then it’s not needed. If it doesn’t, or the data needs to be held in a different way, then it increases risk.
The difference is to allow us to use this data with each other, i.e to verify our citizenship status etc. That’s literally the point.
So it allows additional dissemination of data. So it increases risk.
So what? Speed limits at 70 instead of 40 increases risk.
A lot of complacency, because people aren't looking into the raison d'etre and history of Palantir, or Thiel"s own statements.
He's an exceptionally driven man, who foresees a tech oligarchy, and one of his main intellectual interests is how the *use* of very large amounts of data can achieve this. Why would you want to hand over a large part of your entire nation"s personal data to someone like this, if you were exercising good judgment?
My objection to ID cards is not what the government that introduces them can do, per se (Labour are for the most part incompetent rather than malign, though they do have their moments).
Do you want to gift an ID database to every future government that takes power though? Some of them, particularly the way the world is going, may have much worse intentions.
What’s on this database that the government doesn’t already know? Honestly?
Why make it easier for them and malign actors by collating it in one place?
Because it makes no difference
It absolutely does. Why wouldn’t it? Hacking one definitive source of data on identity is much easier than trying to find it through multiple sources.
The government already has such databases. It’s already in one place. The only difference is an API
No, but on the current foolhardy plans, they could potentially give Peter Thiel, an anti-democratic billionaire and one of the most dangerous people in the world, a huge amount of information on UK citizens
It'sJust madness, really.
I refuse to believe the likes of MI5 and GCHQ do not have such databases already. Almost everyone already gives the likes of Meta and Google more data than this almost every single day. It’s going to make no difference what’s so ever.
We’re tracked on a continuous basis , we have apps on our phones , passports, driving licences , etc and as soon as ID cards are mentioned it seems to set people off .
I do find some of the hysteria over ID cards rather strange given how much data the government already holds .
We happily have driving licences , passports etc . Once again No 10 comms have been useless .
You get out there , frame the debate before others do . Starmer should have had an evening news conference, laid out the plans and stressed it isn’t just about the boats .
If Labour wanted to introduce this, it should have said so in its manifesto. It’s a policy for which it should have obtained a democratic mandate, particularly because it has been proposed and scrapped before.
Do you guys want to “stop the boats” or what? I would prefer we didn’t have compulsory ID cards but ultimately we need to do something different and this is one thing to try
No it isn't.
Anyone hiring anyone illegally, cash in hand, already is breaking the existing laws.
Anyone hiring anyone legally, is already taking proof of right to work in the UK.
Stopping the boats by introducing ID cards is about as meaningful as wearing a balaclava to prevent pregnancy.
My objection to ID cards is not what the government that introduces them can do, per se (Labour are for the most part incompetent rather than malign, though they do have their moments).
Do you want to gift an ID database to every future government that takes power though? Some of them, particularly the way the world is going, may have much worse intentions.
What’s on this database that the government doesn’t already know? Honestly?
Why make it easier for them and malign actors by collating it in one place?
Because it makes no difference
It absolutely does. Why wouldn’t it? Hacking one definitive source of data on identity is much easier than trying to find it through multiple sources.
The government already has such databases. It’s already in one place. The only difference is an API
No, but on the current foolhardy plans, they could potentially give Peter Thiel, an anti-democratic billionaire and one of the most dangerous people in the world, a huge amount of information on UK citizens
It'sJust madness, really.
I refuse to believe the likes of MI5 and GCHQ do not have such databases already. Almost everyone already gives the likes of Meta and Google more data than this almost every single day. It’s going to make no difference what’s so ever.
We’re tracked on a continuous basis , we have apps on our phones , passports, driving licences , etc and as soon as ID cards are mentioned it seems to set people off .
It's not the cards per se, but issues with data integration ; as in the last time; but just even more dangerous this time.
Judging by the opposition across parliament to Starmer's ID cards he may well have difficulty passing it in the House
A gift to Burnham if he also comes out against
It's a clear sign of Starmer's political incompetence. He's just handed the other parties a big stick to beat Labour with all the way to the next election, for no immediate gain. ID cards are not popular and linking them to immigration isn't going to change that.
Labour look like they're failing around trying to find something, anything, that makes it look like they know how to fix immigration. But they've just done what they do rather too often now and reach for the big, clunking authoritarian hammer.
So it is kind of popular. I suspect however very few of the 57% will change their vote to Labour because of this whereas you will get some of the 19% changing their vote to anti-Labour as they feel more strongly about it.
My objection to ID cards is not what the government that introduces them can do, per se (Labour are for the most part incompetent rather than malign, though they do have their moments).
Do you want to gift an ID database to every future government that takes power though? Some of them, particularly the way the world is going, may have much worse intentions.
What’s on this database that the government doesn’t already know? Honestly?
Why make it easier for them and malign actors by collating it in one place?
Because it makes no difference
It absolutely does. Why wouldn’t it? Hacking one definitive source of data on identity is much easier than trying to find it through multiple sources.
The government already has such databases. It’s already in one place. The only difference is an API
No, but on the current foolhardy plans, they could potentially give Peter Thiel, an anti-democratic billionaire and one of the most dangerous people in the world, a huge amount of information on UK citizens
It'sJust madness, really.
I refuse to believe the likes of MI5 and GCHQ do not have such databases already. Almost everyone already gives the likes of Meta and Google more data than this almost every single day. It’s going to make no difference what’s so ever.
We’re tracked on a continuous basis , we have apps on our phones , passports, driving licences , etc and as soon as ID cards are mentioned it seems to set people off .
Apps I can choose whether to install, and delete if I don't want them.
I do find some of the hysteria over ID cards rather strange given how much data the government already holds .
We happily have driving licences , passports etc . Once again No 10 comms have been useless .
You get out there , frame the debate before others do . Starmer should have had an evening news conference, laid out the plans and stressed it isn’t just about the boats .
If Labour wanted to introduce this, it should have said so in its manifesto. It’s a policy for which it should have obtained a democratic mandate, particularly because it has been proposed and scrapped before.
Do you guys want to “stop the boats” or what? I would prefer we didn’t have compulsory ID cards but ultimately we need to do something different and this is one thing to try
No it isn't.
Anyone hiring anyone illegally, cash in hand, already is breaking the existing laws.
Anyone hiring anyone legally, is already taking proof of right to work in the UK.
Stopping the boats by introducing ID cards is about as meaningful as wearing a balaclava to prevent pregnancy.
I mean that’s just factually incorrect - this would provide a validated, quick and cheap way to check
My objection to ID cards is not what the government that introduces them can do, per se (Labour are for the most part incompetent rather than malign, though they do have their moments).
Do you want to gift an ID database to every future government that takes power though? Some of them, particularly the way the world is going, may have much worse intentions.
What’s on this database that the government doesn’t already know? Honestly?
Why make it easier for them and malign actors by collating it in one place?
Because it makes no difference
It absolutely does. Why wouldn’t it? Hacking one definitive source of data on identity is much easier than trying to find it through multiple sources.
The government already has such databases. It’s already in one place. The only difference is an API
No, but on the current foolhardy plans, they could potentially give Peter Thiel, an anti-democratic billionaire and one of the most dangerous people in the world, a huge amount of information on UK citizens
It'sJust madness, really.
I refuse to believe the likes of MI5 and GCHQ do not have such databases already. Almost everyone already gives the likes of Meta and Google more data than this almost every single day. It’s going to make no difference what’s so ever.
We’re tracked on a continuous basis , we have apps on our phones , passports, driving licences , etc and as soon as ID cards are mentioned it seems to set people off .
Apps I can choose whether to install, and delete if I don't want them.
ID cards compulsory by law I can't opt out from.
Apples and radioactive oranges.
You’re a well known libertarian, of course you’re against these. Most people unfortunately value security over liberty
I do find some of the hysteria over ID cards rather strange given how much data the government already holds .
We happily have driving licences , passports etc . Once again No 10 comms have been useless .
You get out there , frame the debate before others do . Starmer should have had an evening news conference, laid out the plans and stressed it isn’t just about the boats .
So because the situation is already rubbish we shouldn't mind it getting even more rubbish. Great argument.
That’s not my argument . A country can’t function without governments holding data on their citizens and ID cards are just no big deal . I think Brits just love to moan and be angry about everything at the moment , it’s a sign of the times , they’re getting as bad as the French ! who strangely don’t moan about ID cards !
I do find some of the hysteria over ID cards rather strange given how much data the government already holds .
We happily have driving licences , passports etc . Once again No 10 comms have been useless .
You get out there , frame the debate before others do . Starmer should have had an evening news conference, laid out the plans and stressed it isn’t just about the boats .
If Labour wanted to introduce this, it should have said so in its manifesto. It’s a policy for which it should have obtained a democratic mandate, particularly because it has been proposed and scrapped before.
Do you guys want to “stop the boats” or what? I would prefer we didn’t have compulsory ID cards but ultimately we need to do something different and this is one thing to try
No it isn't.
Anyone hiring anyone illegally, cash in hand, already is breaking the existing laws.
Anyone hiring anyone legally, is already taking proof of right to work in the UK.
Stopping the boats by introducing ID cards is about as meaningful as wearing a balaclava to prevent pregnancy.
I mean that’s just factually incorrect - this would provide a validated, quick and cheap way to check
There are already ways to check. Its the law already.
Everything I said is factually correct. Introducing a new way to check doesn’t do a damned thing to catch those who deliberately aren't checking and are paying cash in hand.
Those who are hiring legally are already checking.
Kemi against the proposal but not the principle necessarily. Calls for a proper national debate on cards and avoidance of burdens on law abiding citizens Bit half arsed
Apparently there's majority support from the voters from all parties including Reform and ALL Tory Home Secretaries from Hague onwards supported it. It seems Kemi is the one doing the misreading.
Tonight Reform, conservatives, lib dems, the left in labour have all come out against
This is Blair again, and whilst I am ambivalent, it seems opposition is coming at Starmer from all directions
I do find some of the hysteria over ID cards rather strange given how much data the government already holds .
We happily have driving licences , passports etc . Once again No 10 comms have been useless .
You get out there , frame the debate before others do . Starmer should have had an evening news conference, laid out the plans and stressed it isn’t just about the boats .
If Labour wanted to introduce this, it should have said so in its manifesto. It’s a policy for which it should have obtained a democratic mandate, particularly because it has been proposed and scrapped before.
Do you guys want to “stop the boats” or what? I would prefer we didn’t have compulsory ID cards but ultimately we need to do something different and this is one thing to try
No it isn't.
Anyone hiring anyone illegally, cash in hand, already is breaking the existing laws.
Anyone hiring anyone legally, is already taking proof of right to work in the UK.
Stopping the boats by introducing ID cards is about as meaningful as wearing a balaclava to prevent pregnancy.
I mean that’s just factually incorrect - this would provide a validated, quick and cheap way to check
There are already ways to check. Its the law already.
Everything I said is dactually correct. Introducing a new way to check doesn’t do a damned thing to catch those who deliberately aren't checking and are paying cash in hand.
Those who are hiring legally are already checking.
Documents can be forged. This, in theory, would be much harder to fake
I do find some of the hysteria over ID cards rather strange given how much data the government already holds .
We happily have driving licences , passports etc . Once again No 10 comms have been useless .
You get out there , frame the debate before others do . Starmer should have had an evening news conference, laid out the plans and stressed it isn’t just about the boats .
If Labour wanted to introduce this, it should have said so in its manifesto. It’s a policy for which it should have obtained a democratic mandate, particularly because it has been proposed and scrapped before.
Do you guys want to “stop the boats” or what? I would prefer we didn’t have compulsory ID cards but ultimately we need to do something different and this is one thing to try
No it isn't.
Anyone hiring anyone illegally, cash in hand, already is breaking the existing laws.
Anyone hiring anyone legally, is already taking proof of right to work in the UK.
Stopping the boats by introducing ID cards is about as meaningful as wearing a balaclava to prevent pregnancy.
I mean that’s just factually incorrect - this would provide a validated, quick and cheap way to check
There are already ways to check. Its the law already.
Everything I said is dactually correct. Introducing a new way to check doesn’t do a damned thing to catch those who deliberately aren't checking and are paying cash in hand.
Those who are hiring legally are already checking.
Documents can be forged. This, in theory, would be much harder to fake
Judging by the opposition across parliament to Starmer's ID cards he may well have difficulty passing it in the House
A gift to Burnham if he also comes out against
It's a clear sign of Starmer's political incompetence. He's just handed the other parties a big stick to beat Labour with all the way to the next election, for no immediate gain. ID cards are not popular and linking them to immigration isn't going to change that.
Labour look like they're failing around trying to find something, anything, that makes it look like they know how to fix immigration. But they've just done what they do rather too often now and reach for the big, clunking authoritarian hammer.
So it is kind of popular. I suspect however very few of the 57% will change their vote to Labour because of this whereas you will get some of the 19% changing their vote to anti-Labour as they feel more strongly about it.
My objection to ID cards is not what the government that introduces them can do, per se (Labour are for the most part incompetent rather than malign, though they do have their moments).
Do you want to gift an ID database to every future government that takes power though? Some of them, particularly the way the world is going, may have much worse intentions.
What’s on this database that the government doesn’t already know? Honestly?
Why make it easier for them and malign actors by collating it in one place?
Because it makes no difference
It absolutely does. Why wouldn’t it? Hacking one definitive source of data on identity is much easier than trying to find it through multiple sources.
The government already has such databases. It’s already in one place. The only difference is an API
No, but on the current foolhardy plans, they could potentially give Peter Thiel, an anti-democratic billionaire and one of the most dangerous people in the world, a huge amount of information on UK citizens
It'sJust madness, really.
I refuse to believe the likes of MI5 and GCHQ do not have such databases already. Almost everyone already gives the likes of Meta and Google more data than this almost every single day. It’s going to make no difference what’s so ever.
We’re tracked on a continuous basis , we have apps on our phones , passports, driving licences , etc and as soon as ID cards are mentioned it seems to set people off .
But that's because "papers, please" is a hell of a lot easier for the average person to understand than techno-babble from someone like me about how technology enables the invasion of privacy and mass surveillance. People might be just as angry about all those other issues if they were comprehensible to them.
I do find some of the hysteria over ID cards rather strange given how much data the government already holds .
We happily have driving licences , passports etc . Once again No 10 comms have been useless .
You get out there , frame the debate before others do . Starmer should have had an evening news conference, laid out the plans and stressed it isn’t just about the boats .
If Labour wanted to introduce this, it should have said so in its manifesto. It’s a policy for which it should have obtained a democratic mandate, particularly because it has been proposed and scrapped before.
Do you guys want to “stop the boats” or what? I would prefer we didn’t have compulsory ID cards but ultimately we need to do something different and this is one thing to try
No it isn't.
Anyone hiring anyone illegally, cash in hand, already is breaking the existing laws.
Anyone hiring anyone legally, is already taking proof of right to work in the UK.
Stopping the boats by introducing ID cards is about as meaningful as wearing a balaclava to prevent pregnancy.
I mean that’s just factually incorrect - this would provide a validated, quick and cheap way to check
There are already ways to check. Its the law already.
Everything I said is dactually correct. Introducing a new way to check doesn’t do a damned thing to catch those who deliberately aren't checking and are paying cash in hand.
Those who are hiring legally are already checking.
Documents can be forged. This, in theory, would be much harder to fake
If the concern is about forgeries, wouldn’t offering a way to validate someone’s passport or driving licence be better, and simpler? e.g a web form where you can enter name and ID number and a simple yes/no response?
I do find some of the hysteria over ID cards rather strange given how much data the government already holds .
We happily have driving licences , passports etc . Once again No 10 comms have been useless .
You get out there , frame the debate before others do . Starmer should have had an evening news conference, laid out the plans and stressed it isn’t just about the boats .
If Labour wanted to introduce this, it should have said so in its manifesto. It’s a policy for which it should have obtained a democratic mandate, particularly because it has been proposed and scrapped before.
Do you guys want to “stop the boats” or what? I would prefer we didn’t have compulsory ID cards but ultimately we need to do something different and this is one thing to try
No it isn't.
Anyone hiring anyone illegally, cash in hand, already is breaking the existing laws.
Anyone hiring anyone legally, is already taking proof of right to work in the UK.
Stopping the boats by introducing ID cards is about as meaningful as wearing a balaclava to prevent pregnancy.
I mean that’s just factually incorrect - this would provide a validated, quick and cheap way to check
There are already ways to check. Its the law already.
Everything I said is dactually correct. Introducing a new way to check doesn’t do a damned thing to catch those who deliberately aren't checking and are paying cash in hand.
Those who are hiring legally are already checking.
Documents can be forged. This, in theory, would be much harder to fake
Any evidence that people crossing are getting hired via forged documentation, rather than via businesses that pay cash in hand and don't bother to check?
Digital ID can be forged too, people can share a burner phone or impersonate other people's IDs.
I do find some of the hysteria over ID cards rather strange given how much data the government already holds .
We happily have driving licences , passports etc . Once again No 10 comms have been useless .
You get out there , frame the debate before others do . Starmer should have had an evening news conference, laid out the plans and stressed it isn’t just about the boats .
If Labour wanted to introduce this, it should have said so in its manifesto. It’s a policy for which it should have obtained a democratic mandate, particularly because it has been proposed and scrapped before.
Do you guys want to “stop the boats” or what? I would prefer we didn’t have compulsory ID cards but ultimately we need to do something different and this is one thing to try
No it isn't.
Anyone hiring anyone illegally, cash in hand, already is breaking the existing laws.
Anyone hiring anyone legally, is already taking proof of right to work in the UK.
Stopping the boats by introducing ID cards is about as meaningful as wearing a balaclava to prevent pregnancy.
I mean that’s just factually incorrect - this would provide a validated, quick and cheap way to check
There are already ways to check. Its the law already.
Everything I said is dactually correct. Introducing a new way to check doesn’t do a damned thing to catch those who deliberately aren't checking and are paying cash in hand.
Those who are hiring legally are already checking.
Documents can be forged. This, in theory, would be much harder to fake
If the concern is about forgeries, wouldn’t offering a way to validate someone’s passport or driving licence be better, and simpler? e.g a web form where you can enter name and ID number and a simple yes/no response?
Not everyone has a passport or a driving licence though? And in any event you would need a database to query in your scenario so the same security risk exists.
My objection to ID cards is not what the government that introduces them can do, per se (Labour are for the most part incompetent rather than malign, though they do have their moments).
Do you want to gift an ID database to every future government that takes power though? Some of them, particularly the way the world is going, may have much worse intentions.
What’s on this database that the government doesn’t already know? Honestly?
Why make it easier for them and malign actors by collating it in one place?
Because it makes no difference
It absolutely does. Why wouldn’t it? Hacking one definitive source of data on identity is much easier than trying to find it through multiple sources.
The government already has such databases. It’s already in one place. The only difference is an API
No, but on the current foolhardy plans, they could potentially give Peter Thiel, an anti-democratic billionaire and one of the most dangerous people in the world, a huge amount of information on UK citizens
It'sJust madness, really.
I refuse to believe the likes of MI5 and GCHQ do not have such databases already. Almost everyone already gives the likes of Meta and Google more data than this almost every single day. It’s going to make no difference what’s so ever.
We’re tracked on a continuous basis , we have apps on our phones , passports, driving licences , etc and as soon as ID cards are mentioned it seems to set people off .
Apps I can choose whether to install, and delete if I don't want them.
ID cards compulsory by law I can't opt out from.
Apples and radioactive oranges.
You’re a well known libertarian, of course you’re against these. Most people unfortunately value security over liberty
Meanwhile, in the Irish Presidential election campaign...
Every nation has its idiots.
It does but on the other hand, it has been conventional wisdom since the end of the war that Germany should not rearm. Our Irish friend might not have noticed the shift in the zeitgeist.
The Cold War Bundeswehr was hardly three men in a shed.
They were non-nuclear and their tanks prioritised speed over armour, acting more like tank destroyers. They flew Starfighters, an aircraft of such levels of shittiness they coined the term "lawn dart" to describe them. Their forces were light and deployed quickly, leading to wonders like the Wiesel, a two-man very small tank about the size of a Ford Fiesta. In short they were set up to defend the Fulda Gap for as long as it took for the Americans to urgently reinforce Europe whilst Russian tanks ate up the landscape and tactical nukes bloomed.
In short, not the Wehrmacht.
With all due respect, the Starfighter has a completely unmatched record. The F16 can claim 70-80 kills. The F15 over 100. But the Starfighter can claim 115 kills.
The only difference, really, between it and the fighters that followed it, is that its designers hadn't realised that it was the enemy's pilots you were supposed to kill rather than your own.
It was, of course, the aircraft at the centre of the Lockheed bribery scandal.
It was a very demanding aircraft to fly, and the reformed German airforce was pretty inexperienced. In contrast, the Spanish and Norwegian airforces lost hardly any of their at all to accidents. (Note the contemporary English Electric Lightning has a very similar overall accident rate.)
An amazing aircraft for the late 50s. But pretty basic.
The European 104G was optimised for low level strike. I once saw an Italian airforce example buzz Hadrian's Wall at about 100 ft and 500mph+
I do find some of the hysteria over ID cards rather strange given how much data the government already holds .
We happily have driving licences , passports etc . Once again No 10 comms have been useless .
You get out there , frame the debate before others do . Starmer should have had an evening news conference, laid out the plans and stressed it isn’t just about the boats .
If Labour wanted to introduce this, it should have said so in its manifesto. It’s a policy for which it should have obtained a democratic mandate, particularly because it has been proposed and scrapped before.
Do you guys want to “stop the boats” or what? I would prefer we didn’t have compulsory ID cards but ultimately we need to do something different and this is one thing to try
No it isn't.
Anyone hiring anyone illegally, cash in hand, already is breaking the existing laws.
Anyone hiring anyone legally, is already taking proof of right to work in the UK.
Stopping the boats by introducing ID cards is about as meaningful as wearing a balaclava to prevent pregnancy.
I mean that’s just factually incorrect - this would provide a validated, quick and cheap way to check
There are already ways to check. Its the law already.
Everything I said is dactually correct. Introducing a new way to check doesn’t do a damned thing to catch those who deliberately aren't checking and are paying cash in hand.
Those who are hiring legally are already checking.
Documents can be forged. This, in theory, would be much harder to fake
Any evidence that people crossing are getting hired via forged documentation, rather than via businesses that pay cash in hand and don't bother to check?
Digital ID can be forged too, people can share a burner phone or impersonate other people's IDs.
Nothing to do with the people crossing specifically but rather to make it a much more hostile environment to working illegally
Kemi against the proposal but not the principle necessarily. Calls for a proper national debate on cards and avoidance of burdens on law abiding citizens Bit half arsed
Apparently there's majority support from the voters from all parties including Reform and ALL Tory Home Secretaries from Hague onwards supported it. It seems Kemi is the one doing the misreading.
Tonight Reform, conservatives, lib dems, the left in labour have all come out against
This is Blair again, and whilst I am ambivalent, it seems opposition is coming at Starmer from all directions
Labour seems to be the only party that trusts the state.
A lot of people on PB are vocally against ID cards, and have been whenever they're mentioned. So it's good to hear a few pro-ID card voices downthread.
It'd be interesting to know how many people involved in IT or computing are for or against them.
I do find some of the hysteria over ID cards rather strange given how much data the government already holds .
We happily have driving licences , passports etc . Once again No 10 comms have been useless .
You get out there , frame the debate before others do . Starmer should have had an evening news conference, laid out the plans and stressed it isn’t just about the boats .
If Labour wanted to introduce this, it should have said so in its manifesto. It’s a policy for which it should have obtained a democratic mandate, particularly because it has been proposed and scrapped before.
Do you guys want to “stop the boats” or what? I would prefer we didn’t have compulsory ID cards but ultimately we need to do something different and this is one thing to try
No it isn't.
Anyone hiring anyone illegally, cash in hand, already is breaking the existing laws.
Anyone hiring anyone legally, is already taking proof of right to work in the UK.
Stopping the boats by introducing ID cards is about as meaningful as wearing a balaclava to prevent pregnancy.
I mean that’s just factually incorrect - this would provide a validated, quick and cheap way to check
There are already ways to check. Its the law already.
Everything I said is dactually correct. Introducing a new way to check doesn’t do a damned thing to catch those who deliberately aren't checking and are paying cash in hand.
Those who are hiring legally are already checking.
Documents can be forged. This, in theory, would be much harder to fake
Any evidence that people crossing are getting hired via forged documentation, rather than via businesses that pay cash in hand and don't bother to check?
Digital ID can be forged too, people can share a burner phone or impersonate other people's IDs.
Nothing to do with the people crossing specifically but rather to make it a much more hostile environment to working illegally
So no evidence then?
Its already a hostile environment to working illegally. Anyone hiring anyone illegally can already be imprisoned.
I do find some of the hysteria over ID cards rather strange given how much data the government already holds .
We happily have driving licences , passports etc . Once again No 10 comms have been useless .
You get out there , frame the debate before others do . Starmer should have had an evening news conference, laid out the plans and stressed it isn’t just about the boats .
If Labour wanted to introduce this, it should have said so in its manifesto. It’s a policy for which it should have obtained a democratic mandate, particularly because it has been proposed and scrapped before.
Do you guys want to “stop the boats” or what? I would prefer we didn’t have compulsory ID cards but ultimately we need to do something different and this is one thing to try
No it isn't.
Anyone hiring anyone illegally, cash in hand, already is breaking the existing laws.
Anyone hiring anyone legally, is already taking proof of right to work in the UK.
Stopping the boats by introducing ID cards is about as meaningful as wearing a balaclava to prevent pregnancy.
I mean that’s just factually incorrect - this would provide a validated, quick and cheap way to check
There are already ways to check. Its the law already.
Everything I said is dactually correct. Introducing a new way to check doesn’t do a damned thing to catch those who deliberately aren't checking and are paying cash in hand.
Those who are hiring legally are already checking.
Documents can be forged. This, in theory, would be much harder to fake
Any evidence that people crossing are getting hired via forged documentation, rather than via businesses that pay cash in hand and don't bother to check?
Digital ID can be forged too, people can share a burner phone or impersonate other people's IDs.
Nothing to do with the people crossing specifically but rather to make it a much more hostile environment to working illegally
So no evidence then?
Its already a hostile environment to working illegally. Anyone hiring anyone illegally can already be imprisoned.
Meanwhile, in the Irish Presidential election campaign...
Every nation has its idiots.
It does but on the other hand, it has been conventional wisdom since the end of the war that Germany should not rearm. Our Irish friend might not have noticed the shift in the zeitgeist.
The Cold War Bundeswehr was hardly three men in a shed.
They were non-nuclear and their tanks prioritised speed over armour, acting more like tank destroyers. They flew Starfighters, an aircraft of such levels of shittiness they coined the term "lawn dart" to describe them. Their forces were light and deployed quickly, leading to wonders like the Wiesel, a two-man very small tank about the size of a Ford Fiesta. In short they were set up to defend the Fulda Gap for as long as it took for the Americans to urgently reinforce Europe whilst Russian tanks ate up the landscape and tactical nukes bloomed.
In short, not the Wehrmacht.
With all due respect, the Starfighter has a completely unmatched record. The F16 can claim 70-80 kills. The F15 over 100. But the Starfighter can claim 115 kills.
The only difference, really, between it and the fighters that followed it, is that its designers hadn't realised that it was the enemy's pilots you were supposed to kill rather than your own.
It was, of course, the aircraft at the centre of the Lockheed bribery scandal.
It was a very demanding aircraft to fly, and the reformed German airforce was pretty inexperienced. In contrast, the Spanish and Norwegian airforces lost hardly any of their at all to accidents. (Note the contemporary English Electric Lightning has a very similar overall accident rate.)
An amazing aircraft for the late 50s. But pretty basic.
The European 104G was optimised for low level strike. I once saw an Italian airforce example buzz Hadrian's Wall at about 100 ft and 500mph+
I do find some of the hysteria over ID cards rather strange given how much data the government already holds .
We happily have driving licences , passports etc . Once again No 10 comms have been useless .
You get out there , frame the debate before others do . Starmer should have had an evening news conference, laid out the plans and stressed it isn’t just about the boats .
If Labour wanted to introduce this, it should have said so in its manifesto. It’s a policy for which it should have obtained a democratic mandate, particularly because it has been proposed and scrapped before.
Do you guys want to “stop the boats” or what? I would prefer we didn’t have compulsory ID cards but ultimately we need to do something different and this is one thing to try
No it isn't.
Anyone hiring anyone illegally, cash in hand, already is breaking the existing laws.
Anyone hiring anyone legally, is already taking proof of right to work in the UK.
Stopping the boats by introducing ID cards is about as meaningful as wearing a balaclava to prevent pregnancy.
I mean that’s just factually incorrect - this would provide a validated, quick and cheap way to check
There are already ways to check. Its the law already.
Everything I said is dactually correct. Introducing a new way to check doesn’t do a damned thing to catch those who deliberately aren't checking and are paying cash in hand.
Those who are hiring legally are already checking.
Documents can be forged. This, in theory, would be much harder to fake
Any evidence that people crossing are getting hired via forged documentation, rather than via businesses that pay cash in hand and don't bother to check?
Digital ID can be forged too, people can share a burner phone or impersonate other people's IDs.
Nothing to do with the people crossing specifically but rather to make it a much more hostile environment to working illegally
So no evidence then?
Its already a hostile environment to working illegally. Anyone hiring anyone illegally can already be imprisoned.
Those who do so, are breaking existing laws.
Yeah, but they are not being imprisoned.
Because existing laws aren't being enforced and its easy to get away with it with cash in hand when it suits both parties interests to get away with it.
I do find some of the hysteria over ID cards rather strange given how much data the government already holds .
We happily have driving licences , passports etc . Once again No 10 comms have been useless .
You get out there , frame the debate before others do . Starmer should have had an evening news conference, laid out the plans and stressed it isn’t just about the boats .
If Labour wanted to introduce this, it should have said so in its manifesto. It’s a policy for which it should have obtained a democratic mandate, particularly because it has been proposed and scrapped before.
Do you guys want to “stop the boats” or what? I would prefer we didn’t have compulsory ID cards but ultimately we need to do something different and this is one thing to try
No it isn't.
Anyone hiring anyone illegally, cash in hand, already is breaking the existing laws.
Anyone hiring anyone legally, is already taking proof of right to work in the UK.
Stopping the boats by introducing ID cards is about as meaningful as wearing a balaclava to prevent pregnancy.
I mean that’s just factually incorrect - this would provide a validated, quick and cheap way to check
To check what?
What is the problem that compulsory ID cards are trying to solve? If it is illegal hiring of immigrants, a simpler solution is to make it legal. Then they can help the economy and support themselves instead of being a drain on taxpayers.
What are the criteria to get an ID card? It can't be NI number, passport, NHS number or driving licence as not every one has one. I can see a lot of hard cases, particularly with old people or people who migrated here many years ago. And if you don't have one, what are the consequences? I know Reform would deport you using balaclavad UK ICE.
My objection to ID cards is not what the government that introduces them can do, per se (Labour are for the most part incompetent rather than malign, though they do have their moments).
Do you want to gift an ID database to every future government that takes power though? Some of them, particularly the way the world is going, may have much worse intentions.
What’s on this database that the government doesn’t already know? Honestly?
Why make it easier for them and malign actors by collating it in one place?
Because it makes no difference
It absolutely does. Why wouldn’t it? Hacking one definitive source of data on identity is much easier than trying to find it through multiple sources.
The government already has such databases. It’s already in one place. The only difference is an API
No, but on the current foolhardy plans, they could potentially give Peter Thiel, an anti-democratic billionaire and one of the most dangerous people in the world, a huge amount of information on UK citizens
It'sJust madness, really.
I refuse to believe the likes of MI5 and GCHQ do not have such databases already. Almost everyone already gives the likes of Meta and Google more data than this almost every single day. It’s going to make no difference what’s so ever.
We’re tracked on a continuous basis , we have apps on our phones , passports, driving licences , etc and as soon as ID cards are mentioned it seems to set people off .
Apps I can choose whether to install, and delete if I don't want them.
ID cards compulsory by law I can't opt out from.
Apples and radioactive oranges.
You’re a well known libertarian, of course you’re against these. Most people unfortunately value security over liberty
I make no apologies for standing up for liberty.
I wonder what liberty means now. On a 1950s definition I'll stand up for liberty every day, but on a 2050s definition I'm pretty sure I won't.
Now I'm guessing that might be true for you too. If not, then how far will it stretch, and if not quite how do we define the liberty but without being nutty meme?
I do find some of the hysteria over ID cards rather strange given how much data the government already holds .
We happily have driving licences , passports etc . Once again No 10 comms have been useless .
You get out there , frame the debate before others do . Starmer should have had an evening news conference, laid out the plans and stressed it isn’t just about the boats .
If Labour wanted to introduce this, it should have said so in its manifesto. It’s a policy for which it should have obtained a democratic mandate, particularly because it has been proposed and scrapped before.
Do you guys want to “stop the boats” or what? I would prefer we didn’t have compulsory ID cards but ultimately we need to do something different and this is one thing to try
No it isn't.
Anyone hiring anyone illegally, cash in hand, already is breaking the existing laws.
Anyone hiring anyone legally, is already taking proof of right to work in the UK.
Stopping the boats by introducing ID cards is about as meaningful as wearing a balaclava to prevent pregnancy.
I mean that’s just factually incorrect - this would provide a validated, quick and cheap way to check
There are already ways to check. Its the law already.
Everything I said is dactually correct. Introducing a new way to check doesn’t do a damned thing to catch those who deliberately aren't checking and are paying cash in hand.
Those who are hiring legally are already checking.
Documents can be forged. This, in theory, would be much harder to fake
Any evidence that people crossing are getting hired via forged documentation, rather than via businesses that pay cash in hand and don't bother to check?
Digital ID can be forged too, people can share a burner phone or impersonate other people's IDs.
Nothing to do with the people crossing specifically but rather to make it a much more hostile environment to working illegally
So no evidence then?
Its already a hostile environment to working illegally. Anyone hiring anyone illegally can already be imprisoned.
Those who do so, are breaking existing laws.
Yeah, but they are not being imprisoned.
Because existing laws aren't being enforced and its easy to get away with it with cash in hand when it suits both parties interests to get away with it.
I do find some of the hysteria over ID cards rather strange given how much data the government already holds .
We happily have driving licences , passports etc . Once again No 10 comms have been useless .
You get out there , frame the debate before others do . Starmer should have had an evening news conference, laid out the plans and stressed it isn’t just about the boats .
If Labour wanted to introduce this, it should have said so in its manifesto. It’s a policy for which it should have obtained a democratic mandate, particularly because it has been proposed and scrapped before.
Do you guys want to “stop the boats” or what? I would prefer we didn’t have compulsory ID cards but ultimately we need to do something different and this is one thing to try
No it isn't.
Anyone hiring anyone illegally, cash in hand, already is breaking the existing laws.
Anyone hiring anyone legally, is already taking proof of right to work in the UK.
Stopping the boats by introducing ID cards is about as meaningful as wearing a balaclava to prevent pregnancy.
I mean that’s just factually incorrect - this would provide a validated, quick and cheap way to check
To check what?
What is the problem that compulsory ID cards are trying to solve? If it is illegal hiring of immigrants, a simpler solution is to make it legal. Then they can help the economy and support themselves instead of being a drain of taxpayers.
What are the criteria to get an ID card? It can't be NI number, passport, NHS number or driving licence as not every one has one. I can see a lot of hard cases, particularly with old people or people who migrated here many years ago. And if you don't have one, what are the consequences? I know Reform would deport you using balaclavad UK ICE.
The consequence is probably you can’t legally work.
I do find some of the hysteria over ID cards rather strange given how much data the government already holds .
We happily have driving licences , passports etc . Once again No 10 comms have been useless .
You get out there , frame the debate before others do . Starmer should have had an evening news conference, laid out the plans and stressed it isn’t just about the boats .
If Labour wanted to introduce this, it should have said so in its manifesto. It’s a policy for which it should have obtained a democratic mandate, particularly because it has been proposed and scrapped before.
Do you guys want to “stop the boats” or what? I would prefer we didn’t have compulsory ID cards but ultimately we need to do something different and this is one thing to try
No it isn't.
Anyone hiring anyone illegally, cash in hand, already is breaking the existing laws.
Anyone hiring anyone legally, is already taking proof of right to work in the UK.
Stopping the boats by introducing ID cards is about as meaningful as wearing a balaclava to prevent pregnancy.
I mean that’s just factually incorrect - this would provide a validated, quick and cheap way to check
There are already ways to check. Its the law already.
Everything I said is dactually correct. Introducing a new way to check doesn’t do a damned thing to catch those who deliberately aren't checking and are paying cash in hand.
Those who are hiring legally are already checking.
Documents can be forged. This, in theory, would be much harder to fake
Any evidence that people crossing are getting hired via forged documentation, rather than via businesses that pay cash in hand and don't bother to check?
Digital ID can be forged too, people can share a burner phone or impersonate other people's IDs.
Nothing to do with the people crossing specifically but rather to make it a much more hostile environment to working illegally
So no evidence then?
Its already a hostile environment to working illegally. Anyone hiring anyone illegally can already be imprisoned.
Those who do so, are breaking existing laws.
Yeah, but they are not being imprisoned.
Because existing laws aren't being enforced and its easy to get away with it with cash in hand when it suits both parties interests to get away with it.
Not because of ID cards or the lack thereof.
We can do both
But how does it help?
We already have proof of right to work requirements. But cash in hand is very easy to do and very profitable given National Insurance and other taxes aren't payable when you employ someone cash in hand, nor does minimum wage or other laws apply.
Digital ID does nothing to address any of that. Nothing at all.
A lot of people on PB are vocally against ID cards, and have been whenever they're mentioned. So it's good to hear a few pro-ID card voices downthread.
It'd be interesting to know how many people involved in IT or computing are for or against them.
They haven't even got the eVisa scheme properly running yet!
I do find some of the hysteria over ID cards rather strange given how much data the government already holds .
We happily have driving licences , passports etc . Once again No 10 comms have been useless .
You get out there , frame the debate before others do . Starmer should have had an evening news conference, laid out the plans and stressed it isn’t just about the boats .
If Labour wanted to introduce this, it should have said so in its manifesto. It’s a policy for which it should have obtained a democratic mandate, particularly because it has been proposed and scrapped before.
Do you guys want to “stop the boats” or what? I would prefer we didn’t have compulsory ID cards but ultimately we need to do something different and this is one thing to try
No it isn't.
Anyone hiring anyone illegally, cash in hand, already is breaking the existing laws.
Anyone hiring anyone legally, is already taking proof of right to work in the UK.
Stopping the boats by introducing ID cards is about as meaningful as wearing a balaclava to prevent pregnancy.
I mean that’s just factually incorrect - this would provide a validated, quick and cheap way to check
There are already ways to check. Its the law already.
Everything I said is dactually correct. Introducing a new way to check doesn’t do a damned thing to catch those who deliberately aren't checking and are paying cash in hand.
Those who are hiring legally are already checking.
Documents can be forged. This, in theory, would be much harder to fake
Any evidence that people crossing are getting hired via forged documentation, rather than via businesses that pay cash in hand and don't bother to check?
Digital ID can be forged too, people can share a burner phone or impersonate other people's IDs.
Nothing to do with the people crossing specifically but rather to make it a much more hostile environment to working illegally
So no evidence then?
Its already a hostile environment to working illegally. Anyone hiring anyone illegally can already be imprisoned.
Those who do so, are breaking existing laws.
Yeah, but they are not being imprisoned.
Because existing laws aren't being enforced and its easy to get away with it with cash in hand when it suits both parties interests to get away with it.
Not because of ID cards or the lack thereof.
We can do both
But how does it help?
We already have proof of right to work requirements. But cash in hand is very easy to do and very profitable given National Insurance and other taxes aren't payable when you employ someone cash in hand, nor does minimum wage or other laws apply.
Digital ID does nothing to address any of that. Nothing at all.
It literally does, it makes it easier to check somebody’s right to work
Kemi against the proposal but not the principle necessarily. Calls for a proper national debate on cards and avoidance of burdens on law abiding citizens Bit half arsed
Apparently there's majority support from the voters from all parties including Reform and ALL Tory Home Secretaries from Hague onwards supported it. It seems Kemi is the one doing the misreading.
Tonight Reform, conservatives, lib dems, the left in labour have all come out against
This is Blair again, and whilst I am ambivalent, it seems opposition is coming at Starmer from all directions
Labour seems to be the only party that trusts the state.
Or can see a way to monetise all our data.
If he has the votes it is a reasonable but risky political tactical move. If he doesn't have the votes and is expecting support from the Tories or elsewhere it is madness.
"There is particularly strong support among so-called Loyal Nationals, the segment of the electorate which best represents red-wall voters who are a key target group for the political parties. Of these, 63 per cent backed the introduction of digital ID cards and 17 per cent opposed it."
I do find some of the hysteria over ID cards rather strange given how much data the government already holds .
We happily have driving licences , passports etc . Once again No 10 comms have been useless .
You get out there , frame the debate before others do . Starmer should have had an evening news conference, laid out the plans and stressed it isn’t just about the boats .
If Labour wanted to introduce this, it should have said so in its manifesto. It’s a policy for which it should have obtained a democratic mandate, particularly because it has been proposed and scrapped before.
Do you guys want to “stop the boats” or what? I would prefer we didn’t have compulsory ID cards but ultimately we need to do something different and this is one thing to try
No it isn't.
Anyone hiring anyone illegally, cash in hand, already is breaking the existing laws.
Anyone hiring anyone legally, is already taking proof of right to work in the UK.
Stopping the boats by introducing ID cards is about as meaningful as wearing a balaclava to prevent pregnancy.
I mean that’s just factually incorrect - this would provide a validated, quick and cheap way to check
To check what?
What is the problem that compulsory ID cards are trying to solve? If it is illegal hiring of immigrants, a simpler solution is to make it legal. Then they can help the economy and support themselves instead of being a drain on taxpayers.
What are the criteria to get an ID card? It can't be NI number, passport, NHS number or driving licence as not every one has one. I can see a lot of hard cases, particularly with old people or people who migrated here many years ago. And if you don't have one, what are the consequences? I know Reform would deport you using balaclavad UK ICE.
I'd have thought a decent digital ID system could potentially have driving license no, NI number, NHS number, passport as child fields of the overarching national ID no.
I do find some of the hysteria over ID cards rather strange given how much data the government already holds .
We happily have driving licences , passports etc . Once again No 10 comms have been useless .
You get out there , frame the debate before others do . Starmer should have had an evening news conference, laid out the plans and stressed it isn’t just about the boats .
If Labour wanted to introduce this, it should have said so in its manifesto. It’s a policy for which it should have obtained a democratic mandate, particularly because it has been proposed and scrapped before.
Do you guys want to “stop the boats” or what? I would prefer we didn’t have compulsory ID cards but ultimately we need to do something different and this is one thing to try
No it isn't.
Anyone hiring anyone illegally, cash in hand, already is breaking the existing laws.
Anyone hiring anyone legally, is already taking proof of right to work in the UK.
Stopping the boats by introducing ID cards is about as meaningful as wearing a balaclava to prevent pregnancy.
I mean that’s just factually incorrect - this would provide a validated, quick and cheap way to check
There are already ways to check. Its the law already.
Everything I said is dactually correct. Introducing a new way to check doesn’t do a damned thing to catch those who deliberately aren't checking and are paying cash in hand.
Those who are hiring legally are already checking.
Documents can be forged. This, in theory, would be much harder to fake
Any evidence that people crossing are getting hired via forged documentation, rather than via businesses that pay cash in hand and don't bother to check?
Digital ID can be forged too, people can share a burner phone or impersonate other people's IDs.
Nothing to do with the people crossing specifically but rather to make it a much more hostile environment to working illegally
So no evidence then?
Its already a hostile environment to working illegally. Anyone hiring anyone illegally can already be imprisoned.
Those who do so, are breaking existing laws.
Yeah, but they are not being imprisoned.
Because existing laws aren't being enforced and its easy to get away with it with cash in hand when it suits both parties interests to get away with it.
Not because of ID cards or the lack thereof.
We can do both
But how does it help?
We already have proof of right to work requirements. But cash in hand is very easy to do and very profitable given National Insurance and other taxes aren't payable when you employ someone cash in hand, nor does minimum wage or other laws apply.
Digital ID does nothing to address any of that. Nothing at all.
It literally does, it makes it easier to check somebody’s right to work
It literally does nothing to address any of what I wrote. Try reading what I wrote this time.
We already have proof of right to work requirements. But cash in hand is very easy to do and very profitable given National Insurance and other taxes aren't payable when you employ someone cash in hand, nor does minimum wage or other laws apply.
Making it easier to check somebody's right to work does nothing to address how profitable dodging all taxes and minimum wage laws by hiring illegal workers cash in hand is.
I do find some of the hysteria over ID cards rather strange given how much data the government already holds .
We happily have driving licences , passports etc . Once again No 10 comms have been useless .
You get out there , frame the debate before others do . Starmer should have had an evening news conference, laid out the plans and stressed it isn’t just about the boats .
If Labour wanted to introduce this, it should have said so in its manifesto. It’s a policy for which it should have obtained a democratic mandate, particularly because it has been proposed and scrapped before.
Do you guys want to “stop the boats” or what? I would prefer we didn’t have compulsory ID cards but ultimately we need to do something different and this is one thing to try
No it isn't.
Anyone hiring anyone illegally, cash in hand, already is breaking the existing laws.
Anyone hiring anyone legally, is already taking proof of right to work in the UK.
Stopping the boats by introducing ID cards is about as meaningful as wearing a balaclava to prevent pregnancy.
I mean that’s just factually incorrect - this would provide a validated, quick and cheap way to check
There are already ways to check. Its the law already.
Everything I said is dactually correct. Introducing a new way to check doesn’t do a damned thing to catch those who deliberately aren't checking and are paying cash in hand.
Those who are hiring legally are already checking.
Documents can be forged. This, in theory, would be much harder to fake
Any evidence that people crossing are getting hired via forged documentation, rather than via businesses that pay cash in hand and don't bother to check?
Digital ID can be forged too, people can share a burner phone or impersonate other people's IDs.
I dont think many asylum seekers work illegally, not least because it invalidates their application. Hence they spend the day hanging around.
Illegal workers are mostly overstayers or people on other visas without entitlement to work.
I do find some of the hysteria over ID cards rather strange given how much data the government already holds .
We happily have driving licences , passports etc . Once again No 10 comms have been useless .
You get out there , frame the debate before others do . Starmer should have had an evening news conference, laid out the plans and stressed it isn’t just about the boats .
If Labour wanted to introduce this, it should have said so in its manifesto. It’s a policy for which it should have obtained a democratic mandate, particularly because it has been proposed and scrapped before.
Do you guys want to “stop the boats” or what? I would prefer we didn’t have compulsory ID cards but ultimately we need to do something different and this is one thing to try
No it isn't.
Anyone hiring anyone illegally, cash in hand, already is breaking the existing laws.
Anyone hiring anyone legally, is already taking proof of right to work in the UK.
Stopping the boats by introducing ID cards is about as meaningful as wearing a balaclava to prevent pregnancy.
I mean that’s just factually incorrect - this would provide a validated, quick and cheap way to check
There are already ways to check. Its the law already.
Everything I said is dactually correct. Introducing a new way to check doesn’t do a damned thing to catch those who deliberately aren't checking and are paying cash in hand.
Those who are hiring legally are already checking.
Documents can be forged. This, in theory, would be much harder to fake
Any evidence that people crossing are getting hired via forged documentation, rather than via businesses that pay cash in hand and don't bother to check?
Digital ID can be forged too, people can share a burner phone or impersonate other people's IDs.
Nothing to do with the people crossing specifically but rather to make it a much more hostile environment to working illegally
So no evidence then?
Its already a hostile environment to working illegally. Anyone hiring anyone illegally can already be imprisoned.
Those who do so, are breaking existing laws.
Yeah, but they are not being imprisoned.
Because existing laws aren't being enforced and its easy to get away with it with cash in hand when it suits both parties interests to get away with it.
Not because of ID cards or the lack thereof.
We can do both
But how does it help?
We already have proof of right to work requirements. But cash in hand is very easy to do and very profitable given National Insurance and other taxes aren't payable when you employ someone cash in hand, nor does minimum wage or other laws apply.
Digital ID does nothing to address any of that. Nothing at all.
It literally does, it makes it easier to check somebody’s right to work
It literally does nothing to address any of what I wrote. Try reading what I wrote this time.
We already have proof of right to work requirements. But cash in hand is very easy to do and very profitable given National Insurance and other taxes aren't payable when you employ someone cash in hand, nor does minimum wage or other laws apply.
Making it easier to check somebody's right to work does nothing to address how profitable dodging all taxes and minimum wage laws by hiring illegal workers cash in hand is.
I’m reading what you’re saying, I am just ignoring most of it. You’re the one not reading what I am saying.
I know we have proof of right to work. This makes it easier. That is undeniable. “Do you have a Brit Card?” “No.” “That’s a shame.”
Kemi against the proposal but not the principle necessarily. Calls for a proper national debate on cards and avoidance of burdens on law abiding citizens Bit half arsed
Apparently there's majority support from the voters from all parties including Reform and ALL Tory Home Secretaries from Hague onwards supported it. It seems Kemi is the one doing the misreading.
Tonight Reform, conservatives, lib dems, the left in labour have all come out against
This is Blair again, and whilst I am ambivalent, it seems opposition is coming at Starmer from all directions
Labour seems to be the only party that trusts the state.
Or can see a way to monetise all our data.
If he has the votes it is a reasonable but risky political tactical move. If he doesn't have the votes and is expecting support from the Tories or elsewhere it is madness.
"There is particularly strong support among so-called Loyal Nationals, the segment of the electorate which best represents red-wall voters who are a key target group for the political parties. Of these, 63 per cent backed the introduction of digital ID cards and 17 per cent opposed it."
I do find some of the hysteria over ID cards rather strange given how much data the government already holds .
We happily have driving licences , passports etc . Once again No 10 comms have been useless .
You get out there , frame the debate before others do . Starmer should have had an evening news conference, laid out the plans and stressed it isn’t just about the boats .
If Labour wanted to introduce this, it should have said so in its manifesto. It’s a policy for which it should have obtained a democratic mandate, particularly because it has been proposed and scrapped before.
Do you guys want to “stop the boats” or what? I would prefer we didn’t have compulsory ID cards but ultimately we need to do something different and this is one thing to try
No it isn't.
Anyone hiring anyone illegally, cash in hand, already is breaking the existing laws.
Anyone hiring anyone legally, is already taking proof of right to work in the UK.
Stopping the boats by introducing ID cards is about as meaningful as wearing a balaclava to prevent pregnancy.
I mean that’s just factually incorrect - this would provide a validated, quick and cheap way to check
There are already ways to check. Its the law already.
Everything I said is dactually correct. Introducing a new way to check doesn’t do a damned thing to catch those who deliberately aren't checking and are paying cash in hand.
Those who are hiring legally are already checking.
Documents can be forged. This, in theory, would be much harder to fake
Any evidence that people crossing are getting hired via forged documentation, rather than via businesses that pay cash in hand and don't bother to check?
Digital ID can be forged too, people can share a burner phone or impersonate other people's IDs.
Nothing to do with the people crossing specifically but rather to make it a much more hostile environment to working illegally
So no evidence then?
Its already a hostile environment to working illegally. Anyone hiring anyone illegally can already be imprisoned.
Those who do so, are breaking existing laws.
Yeah, but they are not being imprisoned.
Because existing laws aren't being enforced and its easy to get away with it with cash in hand when it suits both parties interests to get away with it.
Not because of ID cards or the lack thereof.
We can do both
But how does it help?
We already have proof of right to work requirements. But cash in hand is very easy to do and very profitable given National Insurance and other taxes aren't payable when you employ someone cash in hand, nor does minimum wage or other laws apply.
Digital ID does nothing to address any of that. Nothing at all.
It literally does, it makes it easier to check somebody’s right to work
It literally does nothing to address any of what I wrote. Try reading what I wrote this time.
We already have proof of right to work requirements. But cash in hand is very easy to do and very profitable given National Insurance and other taxes aren't payable when you employ someone cash in hand, nor does minimum wage or other laws apply.
Making it easier to check somebody's right to work does nothing to address how profitable dodging all taxes and minimum wage laws by hiring illegal workers cash in hand is.
I’m reading what you’re saying, I am just ignoring most of it. You’re the one not reading what I am saying.
I know we have proof of right to work. This makes it easier. That is undeniable. “Do you have a Brit Card?” “No.” “That’s a shame.”
I didn’t say it would solve the other issue.
The other issue is the one you claimed it would solve though.
Do you guys want to “stop the boats” or what? I would prefer we didn’t have compulsory ID cards but ultimately we need to do something different and this is one thing to try
That's a shame.
Nobody is crossing because its hard to check for ID, as is already legally necessary.
Difficulty in checking ID isn't the issue. The other one is the issue and this does nothing to address it.
I do find some of the hysteria over ID cards rather strange given how much data the government already holds .
We happily have driving licences , passports etc . Once again No 10 comms have been useless .
You get out there , frame the debate before others do . Starmer should have had an evening news conference, laid out the plans and stressed it isn’t just about the boats .
If Labour wanted to introduce this, it should have said so in its manifesto. It’s a policy for which it should have obtained a democratic mandate, particularly because it has been proposed and scrapped before.
Do you guys want to “stop the boats” or what? I would prefer we didn’t have compulsory ID cards but ultimately we need to do something different and this is one thing to try
No it isn't.
Anyone hiring anyone illegally, cash in hand, already is breaking the existing laws.
Anyone hiring anyone legally, is already taking proof of right to work in the UK.
Stopping the boats by introducing ID cards is about as meaningful as wearing a balaclava to prevent pregnancy.
I mean that’s just factually incorrect - this would provide a validated, quick and cheap way to check
To check what?
What is the problem that compulsory ID cards are trying to solve? If it is illegal hiring of immigrants, a simpler solution is to make it legal. Then they can help the economy and support themselves instead of being a drain on taxpayers.
What are the criteria to get an ID card? It can't be NI number, passport, NHS number or driving licence as not every one has one. I can see a lot of hard cases, particularly with old people or people who migrated here many years ago. And if you don't have one, what are the consequences? I know Reform would deport you using balaclavad UK ICE.
I'd have thought a decent digital ID system could potentially have driving license no, NI number, NHS number, passport as child fields of the overarching national ID no.
Because of course there is absolutely no problem with having all that information in one place, which if lost or stolen, will be an absolute gold mine for the thief.
It is an utterly daft authoritarian idea, for which Labour has no mandate.
Plus imagine the utter fuck up which Fujitsu or similar will make of the database behind it.
I do find some of the hysteria over ID cards rather strange given how much data the government already holds .
We happily have driving licences , passports etc . Once again No 10 comms have been useless .
You get out there , frame the debate before others do . Starmer should have had an evening news conference, laid out the plans and stressed it isn’t just about the boats .
If Labour wanted to introduce this, it should have said so in its manifesto. It’s a policy for which it should have obtained a democratic mandate, particularly because it has been proposed and scrapped before.
Do you guys want to “stop the boats” or what? I would prefer we didn’t have compulsory ID cards but ultimately we need to do something different and this is one thing to try
No it isn't.
Anyone hiring anyone illegally, cash in hand, already is breaking the existing laws.
Anyone hiring anyone legally, is already taking proof of right to work in the UK.
Stopping the boats by introducing ID cards is about as meaningful as wearing a balaclava to prevent pregnancy.
I mean that’s just factually incorrect - this would provide a validated, quick and cheap way to check
There are already ways to check. Its the law already.
Everything I said is dactually correct. Introducing a new way to check doesn’t do a damned thing to catch those who deliberately aren't checking and are paying cash in hand.
Those who are hiring legally are already checking.
Documents can be forged. This, in theory, would be much harder to fake
Any evidence that people crossing are getting hired via forged documentation, rather than via businesses that pay cash in hand and don't bother to check?
Digital ID can be forged too, people can share a burner phone or impersonate other people's IDs.
Nothing to do with the people crossing specifically but rather to make it a much more hostile environment to working illegally
So no evidence then?
Its already a hostile environment to working illegally. Anyone hiring anyone illegally can already be imprisoned.
Those who do so, are breaking existing laws.
Yeah, but they are not being imprisoned.
Because existing laws aren't being enforced and its easy to get away with it with cash in hand when it suits both parties interests to get away with it.
Not because of ID cards or the lack thereof.
We can do both
But how does it help?
We already have proof of right to work requirements. But cash in hand is very easy to do and very profitable given National Insurance and other taxes aren't payable when you employ someone cash in hand, nor does minimum wage or other laws apply.
Digital ID does nothing to address any of that. Nothing at all.
It literally does, it makes it easier to check somebody’s right to work
It literally does nothing to address any of what I wrote. Try reading what I wrote this time.
We already have proof of right to work requirements. But cash in hand is very easy to do and very profitable given National Insurance and other taxes aren't payable when you employ someone cash in hand, nor does minimum wage or other laws apply.
Making it easier to check somebody's right to work does nothing to address how profitable dodging all taxes and minimum wage laws by hiring illegal workers cash in hand is.
I’m reading what you’re saying, I am just ignoring most of it. You’re the one not reading what I am saying.
I know we have proof of right to work. This makes it easier. That is undeniable. “Do you have a Brit Card?” “No.” “That’s a shame.”
I didn’t say it would solve the other issue.
The other issue is the one you claimed it would solve though.
Do you guys want to “stop the boats” or what? I would prefer we didn’t have compulsory ID cards but ultimately we need to do something different and this is one thing to try
That's a shame.
Nobody is crossing because its hard to check for ID, as is already legally necessary.
Like I said, it’s about making the environment more hostile to illegal working. It’s a nuance you’ve never been capable of.
I do find some of the hysteria over ID cards rather strange given how much data the government already holds .
We happily have driving licences , passports etc . Once again No 10 comms have been useless .
You get out there , frame the debate before others do . Starmer should have had an evening news conference, laid out the plans and stressed it isn’t just about the boats .
If Labour wanted to introduce this, it should have said so in its manifesto. It’s a policy for which it should have obtained a democratic mandate, particularly because it has been proposed and scrapped before.
Do you guys want to “stop the boats” or what? I would prefer we didn’t have compulsory ID cards but ultimately we need to do something different and this is one thing to try
No it isn't.
Anyone hiring anyone illegally, cash in hand, already is breaking the existing laws.
Anyone hiring anyone legally, is already taking proof of right to work in the UK.
Stopping the boats by introducing ID cards is about as meaningful as wearing a balaclava to prevent pregnancy.
I mean that’s just factually incorrect - this would provide a validated, quick and cheap way to check
To check what?
What is the problem that compulsory ID cards are trying to solve? If it is illegal hiring of immigrants, a simpler solution is to make it legal. Then they can help the economy and support themselves instead of being a drain on taxpayers.
What are the criteria to get an ID card? It can't be NI number, passport, NHS number or driving licence as not every one has one. I can see a lot of hard cases, particularly with old people or people who migrated here many years ago. And if you don't have one, what are the consequences? I know Reform would deport you using balaclavad UK ICE.
I'd have thought a decent digital ID system could potentially have driving license no, NI number, NHS number, passport as child fields of the overarching national ID no.
Because of course there is absolutely no problem with having all that information in one place, which if lost or stolen, will be an absolute gold mine for the thief.
It is an utterly daft authoritarian idea, for which Labour has no mandate.
If it is such a goldmine for thieves, why do I have to send it off to every bookie I want to bet with?
My objection to ID cards is not what the government that introduces them can do, per se (Labour are for the most part incompetent rather than malign, though they do have their moments).
Do you want to gift an ID database to every future government that takes power though? Some of them, particularly the way the world is going, may have much worse intentions.
What’s on this database that the government doesn’t already know? Honestly?
Why make it easier for them and malign actors by collating it in one place?
Because it makes no difference
It absolutely does. Why wouldn’t it? Hacking one definitive source of data on identity is much easier than trying to find it through multiple sources.
The government already has such databases. It’s already in one place. The only difference is an API
No, but on the current foolhardy plans, they could potentially give Peter Thiel, an anti-democratic billionaire and one of the most dangerous people in the world, a huge amount of information on UK citizens
It'sJust madness, really.
I refuse to believe the likes of MI5 and GCHQ do not have such databases already. Almost everyone already gives the likes of Meta and Google more data than this almost every single day. It’s going to make no difference what’s so ever.
We’re tracked on a continuous basis , we have apps on our phones , passports, driving licences , etc and as soon as ID cards are mentioned it seems to set people off .
Apps I can choose whether to install, and delete if I don't want them.
ID cards compulsory by law I can't opt out from.
Apples and radioactive oranges.
You’re a well known libertarian, of course you’re against these. Most people unfortunately value security over liberty
Comments
Fuck off.
There's a bit of a race to the bottom with the established political parties. They all stopped being worthwhile some years ago. Quite why new political parties like Reform should choose to march into the same territory escapes me. Admittedly Corbyn and co are still trying to drag us off a cliff of stupidity. That's different, although very very boringly longstanding.
Do you want to gift an ID database to every future government that takes power though? Some of them, particularly the way the world is going, may have much worse intentions.
This reminds me of the issues last time ; the Home Office chose a scheme more comprehensive and intrusive than anything else operating in Europe, with the result that only the Thai government was interested in emulating it.
A gift to Burnham if he also comes out against
Imagine all that data falling into the hands of Putin or the CCP.
As most all the opposition parties, including the Lib Dems oppose,,maybe you are on the losing side on this one
@moveincircles
Crazy maybe but hear me out, why don’t we deport all the illegals and then not have digital ID"
https://x.com/moveincircles/status/1971275999687082036
Bit First World Problem mind. I got the brand new top of the range Orange iPhone yesterday and managed to crack the screen within minutes and now I can't find my appointment for oysters and fine wines at the Groucho.
I'm just not sure the public will see the link between small boats and ID cards.
It'sJust madness, really.
We happily have driving licences , passports etc . Once again No 10 comms have been useless .
You get out there , frame the debate before others do . Starmer should have had an evening news conference, laid out the plans and stressed it isn’t just about the boats .
If you think the government already holds all the information it needs, then why do you need an additional ID card?
Either it has utility, or it doesn’t. If it doesn’t have utility because, as you claim, this data is already held, then it’s not needed. If it doesn’t, or the data needs to be held in a different way, then it increases risk.
In practice the consultation process will last 6 months, the legislation another 12, and implementation 2-3 years before the first digital card is issued.
Just in time for it to be scrapped by the next government before it becomes mandatory, I can only hope. Rinse and repeat of 20 years ago.
It is possible to have a good ID card system and we will fall behind other countries a little without one.
Any system HMG implements will probably be rubbish, unsecure, intrusive, expensive and abandoned within the decade.
Labour look like they're failing around trying to find something, anything, that makes it look like they know how to fix immigration. But they've just done what they do rather too often now and reach for the big, clunking authoritarian hammer.
He's an exceptionally driven man, who foresees a tech oligarchy, and one of his main intellectual interests is how the *use* of very large amounts of data can achieve this. Why would you want to hand over a large part of your entire nation"s personal data to someone like this, if you were exercising good judgment?
Anyone hiring anyone illegally, cash in hand, already is breaking the existing laws.
Anyone hiring anyone legally, is already taking proof of right to work in the UK.
Stopping the boats by introducing ID cards is about as meaningful as wearing a balaclava to prevent pregnancy.
57% support vs 19% oppose.
So it is kind of popular. I suspect however very few of the 57% will change their vote to Labour because of this whereas you will get some of the 19% changing their vote to anti-Labour as they feel more strongly about it.
ID cards compulsory by law I can't opt out from.
Apples and radioactive oranges.
Everything I said is factually correct. Introducing a new way to check doesn’t do a damned thing to catch those who deliberately aren't checking and are paying cash in hand.
Those who are hiring legally are already checking.
This is Blair again, and whilst I am ambivalent, it seems opposition is coming at Starmer from all directions
Digital ID can be forged too, people can share a burner phone or impersonate other people's IDs.
It was a very demanding aircraft to fly, and the reformed German airforce was pretty inexperienced.
In contrast, the Spanish and Norwegian airforces lost hardly any of their at all to accidents.
(Note the contemporary English Electric Lightning has a very similar overall accident rate.)
An amazing aircraft for the late 50s.
But pretty basic.
The European 104G was optimised for low level strike. I once saw an Italian airforce example buzz Hadrian's Wall at about 100 ft and 500mph+
Or can see a way to monetise all our data.
It'd be interesting to know how many people involved in IT or computing are for or against them.
Its already a hostile environment to working illegally. Anyone hiring anyone illegally can already be imprisoned.
Those who do so, are breaking existing laws.
Not because of ID cards or the lack thereof.
What is the problem that compulsory ID cards are trying to solve?
If it is illegal hiring of immigrants, a simpler solution is to make it legal.
Then they can help the economy and support themselves instead of being a drain on taxpayers.
What are the criteria to get an ID card? It can't be NI number, passport, NHS number or driving licence as not every one has one.
I can see a lot of hard cases, particularly with old people or people who migrated here many years ago.
And if you don't have one, what are the consequences? I know Reform would deport you using balaclavad UK ICE.
Now I'm guessing that might be true for you too. If not, then how far will it stretch, and if not quite how do we define the liberty but without being nutty meme?
Starmer: Burnham would ‘inflict harm’ like Truss
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2025/09/25/keir-starmer-andy-burnham-would-inflict-harm-like-liz-truss/
We already have proof of right to work requirements. But cash in hand is very easy to do and very profitable given National Insurance and other taxes aren't payable when you employ someone cash in hand, nor does minimum wage or other laws apply.
Digital ID does nothing to address any of that. Nothing at all.
"There is particularly strong support among so-called Loyal Nationals, the segment of the electorate which best represents red-wall voters who are a key target group for the political parties. Of these, 63 per cent backed the introduction of digital ID cards and 17 per cent opposed it."
https://www.thetimes.com/uk/politics/article/digital-id-cards-crime-justice-commission-hcvbxfj57
Time to see what he's up to.
We already have proof of right to work requirements. But cash in hand is very easy to do and very profitable given National Insurance and other taxes aren't payable when you employ someone cash in hand, nor does minimum wage or other laws apply.
Making it easier to check somebody's right to work does nothing to address how profitable dodging all taxes and minimum wage laws by hiring illegal workers cash in hand is.
Illegal workers are mostly overstayers or people on other visas without entitlement to work.
I know we have proof of right to work. This makes it easier. That is undeniable. “Do you have a Brit Card?” “No.” “That’s a shame.”
I didn’t say it would solve the other issue.
"Nigel Farage blasts Keir Starmer's digital ID plan before warning 'state should never have this much power'"
https://www.gbnews.com/politics/politics-news-nigel-farage-reform-uk-boris-johnson-keir-starmer
I'm coming to the conclusion that this a performative Labour cock-up.
https://www.aratek.co/news/emirates-id-explained-your-gateway-to-uae-services#:~:text=The Emirates ID card (EID,of identity verification and management.
Do you guys want to “stop the boats” or what? I would prefer we didn’t have compulsory ID cards but ultimately we need to do something different and this is one thing to try
That's a shame.
Nobody is crossing because its hard to check for ID, as is already legally necessary.
Difficulty in checking ID isn't the issue. The other one is the issue and this does nothing to address it.
It is an utterly daft authoritarian idea, for which Labour has no mandate.
Plus imagine the utter fuck up which Fujitsu or similar will make of the database behind it.