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."
The question for me is how long that support stands once the right wing populists start up about it. Because assuming they are against (probably because it’s being proposed by Starmer) it will be an “assault on traditional British liberty” / “not British” / “not what we won the war for” / “Starmer’s thought police coming for you” etc etc.
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.
It's no more hostile, we already are fully hostile to it.
Anyone hiring anyone legally is already checking ID. Every legitimate employer does it.
Crooks don't. This will do nothing to stop people from being crooks.
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'm vociferously against them in principle, but 30 years working in IT means I'm also very aware of how having a giant central database of the personal details of everyone in the country is a colossally fucking terrible idea on many levels.
The common thread I see in pro-ID arguments is a belief the system will work as advertised and be used only for the stated purpose. Given the history of such projects that strikes me as misplaced faith on par with grown adults believing in the tooth fairy.
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.
But not standing up for security?
"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin.
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.
It's no more hostile, we already are fully hostile to it.
Anyone hiring anyone legally is already checking ID. Every legitimate employer does it.
Crooks don't. This will do nothing to stop people from being crooks.
I didn’t say that it would stop people from being crooks. You’re arguing with yourself.
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
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.
Asylum seekers spend all day in taxis going to hospital appointments miles away. They don’t have time 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."
The question for me is how long that support stands once the right wing populists start up about it. Because assuming they are against (probably because it’s being proposed by Starmer) it will be an “assault on traditional British liberty” / “not British” / “not what we won the war for” / “Starmer’s thought police coming for you” etc etc.
I'm afraid it's just another inept move by the government. The populist right and the libertarian left are already gearing up to oppose it, just as they should, particularly considering not only the very wide scope, but even more the mad involving of Palantir.
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.
Yes - but my point was what info will you need to provide to get an ID card.
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.
it looks like every EU country bar one has them.Why do you believe they have all got it wrong? Or is it that our situation is different?
When we onboard new clients we are required to ask them to take a photo of their passport and themselves and upload it to a third party app which then checks the details and also cross references sanctions lists, etc. These databases already exist. It’s totally naive to think otherwise.
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.
But not standing up for security?
Absolutely. Those who give up liberty to purchase security deserve and get neither.
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.
It's no more hostile, we already are fully hostile to it.
Anyone hiring anyone legally is already checking ID. Every legitimate employer does it.
Crooks don't. This will do nothing to stop people from being crooks.
I didn’t say that it would stop people from being crooks. You’re arguing with yourself.
No, I'm arguing with you.
If it doesn't stop people from being crooks, it doesn't help, since it is crooks who are hiring people illegally already.
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.
It's no more hostile, we already are fully hostile to it.
Anyone hiring anyone legally is already checking ID. Every legitimate employer does it.
Crooks don't. This will do nothing to stop people from being crooks.
I didn’t say that it would stop people from being crooks. You’re arguing with yourself.
No, I'm arguing with you.
If it doesn't stop people from being crooks, it doesn't help, since it is crooks who are hiring people illegally already.
Survation Holyrood Constituency vote SNP 37 Labour 20 Reform 18 Con 11 LD 7 Green 5 Alba 1
List vote SNP 31 Lab 18 Reform 15 Con 13 LD 11 Green 8 Alba 2
SNP almost knocking on an outright majority. Impossible as it is for much of PB to comprehend they’ve had a good few weeks if you ignore BBC Scotland headlines. Will Your Party get their act together before next May? I think not but if they did and came out with an indy curious offer they might do okay, ie a seat or two. Lot of ifs there of course.
Are they not about to get a second hand kicking re trans when Sandie Peggie wins bigly in her claim against Fife NHS (and indirectly the Scottish Governments ludicrous Trans policies)?
No idea, I leave that stuff to the toilet monitors.
I wonder if @turbotubbs is expecting to be one of the "Are you female?" toilet inspectors?
I'm not expecting any toilet inspectors. I am hoping that women will be allowed single sex spaces away from ALL men, including those who believe that they are women, and those who fantasize that they are women. Including those with all male genitalia, currently trying to impregnate their girlfriend and expecting women to change alongside them (see Durham).
If you don't believe in the right of women to have single sex spaces then you don't believe in women's rights.
Really? There are a lot of pro-trans feminists who you think don't believe in women's rights, then.
Let me ask a question: why should someone who has been through full gender transition for decades, and has been using women's facilities for those decades, now have to use male, or disabled if available, facilities? What has changed?
Nothing has changed. That's the point. Their sex has not changed. And they have never ever had the right to use the facilities reserved for the opposite sex. The fact that they have breached those boundaries before means Jack shit. Breaking the law does not - however often you do it - give you the right to keep on doing 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
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.
Asylum seekers spend all day in taxis going to hospital appointments miles away. They don’t have time to work.
I have a genius plan. We need to let them work.....as taxi drivers.
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.
It's no more hostile, we already are fully hostile to it.
Anyone hiring anyone legally is already checking ID. Every legitimate employer does it.
Crooks don't. This will do nothing to stop people from being crooks.
I didn’t say that it would stop people from being crooks. You’re arguing with yourself.
No, I'm arguing with you.
If it doesn't stop people from being crooks, it doesn't help, since it is crooks who are hiring people illegally already.
You’re just repeating yourself now
Because you keep claiming that this helps, when the issue is criminals hiring people illegally and it does bugger all to deal with criminality.
Nobody is hiring anyone illegally because of the difficulty in checking ID. They're doing so because then they can dodge taxes, minimum wage laws and other laws.
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
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.
Asylum seekers spend all day in taxis going to hospital appointments miles away. They don’t have time to work.
I have a genius plan. We need to let them work.....as taxi drivers.
There are quite possibly both taxi drivers and doctors at the hotel.....
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.
All linked back to a unique iris scan
Iris says she's unique, but how come everyone has her scan?
I know it’s Find Out Now and they aren’t the best pollster for the Conservatives but 14% must be an all time polling low for the party - it’s the worst number since the GE.
Needless to say, on those numbers, you’d imagine a “loveless landslide” for Nigel Farage and Reform.
When we onboard new clients we are required to ask them to take a photo of their passport and themselves and upload it to a third party app which then checks the details and also cross references sanctions lists, etc. These databases already exist. It’s totally naive to think otherwise.
Yes, not only has the horse got through the gate, he is several fields away.
It seems there are three groups here. Those that are ideologically opposed to ID cards. Those that support ID cards. Those that are theoretically in favour, but know that any system we introduce will be gold plated, hideously expensive, badly implemented by someone like Fujitsu, managed on the cheap by some private foreign company that sells or loses the data, and won’t believe that the system isn’t infallible, despite evidence from many individual cases. I suspect this will be the largest group.
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
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.
Asylum seekers spend all day in taxis going to hospital appointments miles away. They don’t have time to work.
I have a genius plan. We need to let them work.....as taxi drivers.
Reminds me of the joke in MIB where it is explained that most of aliens in New York were simply living normal lives. " As taxi drivers? " asks J. "Not as many as you might think" replied K.
Survation Holyrood Constituency vote SNP 37 Labour 20 Reform 18 Con 11 LD 7 Green 5 Alba 1
List vote SNP 31 Lab 18 Reform 15 Con 13 LD 11 Green 8 Alba 2
SNP almost knocking on an outright majority. Impossible as it is for much of PB to comprehend they’ve had a good few weeks if you ignore BBC Scotland headlines. Will Your Party get their act together before next May? I think not but if they did and came out with an indy curious offer they might do okay, ie a seat or two. Lot of ifs there of course.
Are they not about to get a second hand kicking re trans when Sandie Peggie wins bigly in her claim against Fife NHS (and indirectly the Scottish Governments ludicrous Trans policies)?
No idea, I leave that stuff to the toilet monitors.
I wonder if @turbotubbs is expecting to be one of the "Are you female?" toilet inspectors?
I'm not expecting any toilet inspectors. I am hoping that women will be allowed single sex spaces away from ALL men, including those who believe that they are women, and those who fantasize that they are women. Including those with all male genitalia, currently trying to impregnate their girlfriend and expecting women to change alongside them (see Durham).
If you don't believe in the right of women to have single sex spaces then you don't believe in women's rights.
Really? There are a lot of pro-trans feminists who you think don't believe in women's rights, then.
Let me ask a question: why should someone who has been through full gender transition for decades, and has been using women's facilities for those decades, now have to use male, or disabled if available, facilities? What has changed?
The law has been clarified. Men CANNOT become women by surgery, by fairy dust, by will power.
I have every sympathy for transwomen. And they have the same rights as everyone else, but just as they cannot become a horse they cannot become a woman.
You don't show much sympathy.
In what way? I would treat (and have done) a trans person the same as any other. I simply do not believe that you can change sex/gender or whatever you want to call it. The debate is ridiculous.
I note that the UN has deemed that trans is not a mental illness (no doubt after significant pressure from pro trans lobbying). Yet body dysmorphia is still a mental illness.
I do not seek to tell anyone who to live their lives, who they can have sex with, how they can dress. I merely wish the law respected and that women's single sex spaces remain for women, not for anyone who the law regards as a man.
A you know what - this is a dangerous thing to say. People have been hounded out of work because of this belief.
And trans people have been hounded to suicide and worse through bullying. And even murdered. I have witnessed the bullying this myself with trans friends and colleagues.
As ever you ignore the serious criminal offences committed against women and children by people claiming to be trans - 3 founders of Pride convicted or under investigation for child sexual abuse, a girl kidnapped and repeatedly raped by a transgender man who had been trans for ages and ages, a 12 year old girl sexually assaulted by a 6 ft 2 man pretending to be a woman, the voyeurism and indecent exposure by "Rose", the Darlington nurse and so on. One child claiming to be trans has been murdered in the U.K. A dreadful case. But the far greater number of sexual assaults by men claiming to be trans against women and girls - look up the latest MoJ figures - never ever bother you, a so-called male feminist ally.
Survation Holyrood Constituency vote SNP 37 Labour 20 Reform 18 Con 11 LD 7 Green 5 Alba 1
List vote SNP 31 Lab 18 Reform 15 Con 13 LD 11 Green 8 Alba 2
SNP almost knocking on an outright majority. Impossible as it is for much of PB to comprehend they’ve had a good few weeks if you ignore BBC Scotland headlines. Will Your Party get their act together before next May? I think not but if they did and came out with an indy curious offer they might do okay, ie a seat or two. Lot of ifs there of course.
Are they not about to get a second hand kicking re trans when Sandie Peggie wins bigly in her claim against Fife NHS (and indirectly the Scottish Governments ludicrous Trans policies)?
No idea, I leave that stuff to the toilet monitors.
I wonder if @turbotubbs is expecting to be one of the "Are you female?" toilet inspectors?
I'm not expecting any toilet inspectors. I am hoping that women will be allowed single sex spaces away from ALL men, including those who believe that they are women, and those who fantasize that they are women. Including those with all male genitalia, currently trying to impregnate their girlfriend and expecting women to change alongside them (see Durham).
If you don't believe in the right of women to have single sex spaces then you don't believe in women's rights.
Really? There are a lot of pro-trans feminists who you think don't believe in women's rights, then.
Let me ask a question: why should someone who has been through full gender transition for decades, and has been using women's facilities for those decades, now have to use male, or disabled if available, facilities? What has changed?
The law has been clarified. Men CANNOT become women by surgery, by fairy dust, by will power.
I have every sympathy for transwomen. And they have the same rights as everyone else, but just as they cannot become a horse they cannot become a woman.
Hang on a sec, that's not what the court said. They said that, for the purposes of the Equality Act, a person could not change their sex. But the Equality Act also states that a person should not be discriminated against on the basis of their transgender identity.
So it's not as simple as saying that, "trans women are men," just as it was never as simple as saying that, "trans women are women."
The Equality Act does not say that. Gender identity is not a protected characteristic. It is gender reassignment which is a defined term.
I know it’s Find Out Now and they aren’t the best pollster for the Conservatives but 14% must be an all time polling low for the party - it’s the worst number since the GE.
Needless to say, on those numbers, you’d imagine a “loveless landslide” for Nigel Farage and Reform.
What happens to that 14% if there is a full implosion?
Maybe?
7% Reform 1% Labour 4% LDs 1% Fringe and nationalists 2% Do not vote
It seems there are three groups here. Those that are ideologically opposed to ID cards. Those that support ID cards. Those that are theoretically in favour, but know that any system we introduce will be gold plated, hideously expensive, badly implemented by someone like Fujitsu, managed on the cheap by some private foreign company that sells or loses the data, and won’t believe that the system isn’t infallible, despite evidence from many individual cases. I suspect this will be the largest group.
Palantir, not Fujitsu, so the malign rather than the incompetent...
I know it’s Find Out Now and they aren’t the best pollster for the Conservatives but 14% must be an all time polling low for the party - it’s the worst number since the GE.
Needless to say, on those numbers, you’d imagine a “loveless landslide” for Nigel Farage and Reform.
Yes on the Find Out Now numbers you get:
Ref 436 LD 68 (Official opposition) Lab 57 SNP 46 Con 11 Grn 8
Survation Holyrood Constituency vote SNP 37 Labour 20 Reform 18 Con 11 LD 7 Green 5 Alba 1
List vote SNP 31 Lab 18 Reform 15 Con 13 LD 11 Green 8 Alba 2
SNP almost knocking on an outright majority. Impossible as it is for much of PB to comprehend they’ve had a good few weeks if you ignore BBC Scotland headlines. Will Your Party get their act together before next May? I think not but if they did and came out with an indy curious offer they might do okay, ie a seat or two. Lot of ifs there of course.
Are they not about to get a second hand kicking re trans when Sandie Peggie wins bigly in her claim against Fife NHS (and indirectly the Scottish Governments ludicrous Trans policies)?
No idea, I leave that stuff to the toilet monitors.
I wonder if @turbotubbs is expecting to be one of the "Are you female?" toilet inspectors?
I'm not expecting any toilet inspectors. I am hoping that women will be allowed single sex spaces away from ALL men, including those who believe that they are women, and those who fantasize that they are women. Including those with all male genitalia, currently trying to impregnate their girlfriend and expecting women to change alongside them (see Durham).
If you don't believe in the right of women to have single sex spaces then you don't believe in women's rights.
Really? There are a lot of pro-trans feminists who you think don't believe in women's rights, then.
Let me ask a question: why should someone who has been through full gender transition for decades, and has been using women's facilities for those decades, now have to use male, or disabled if available, facilities? What has changed?
The law has been clarified. Men CANNOT become women by surgery, by fairy dust, by will power.
I have every sympathy for transwomen. And they have the same rights as everyone else, but just as they cannot become a horse they cannot become a woman.
You don't show much sympathy.
In what way? I would treat (and have done) a trans person the same as any other. I simply do not believe that you can change sex/gender or whatever you want to call it. The debate is ridiculous.
I note that the UN has deemed that trans is not a mental illness (no doubt after significant pressure from pro trans lobbying). Yet body dysmorphia is still a mental illness.
I do not seek to tell anyone who to live their lives, who they can have sex with, how they can dress. I merely wish the law respected and that women's single sex spaces remain for women, not for anyone who the law regards as a man.
A you know what - this is a dangerous thing to say. People have been hounded out of work because of this belief.
And trans people have been hounded to suicide and worse through bullying. And even murdered. I have witnessed the bullying this myself with trans friends and colleagues.
As ever you ignore the serious criminal offences committed against women and children by people claiming to be trans - 3 founders of Pride convicted or under investigation for child sexual abuse, a girl kidnapped and repeatedly raped by a transgender man who had been trans for ages and ages, a 12 year old girl sexually assaulted by a 6 ft 2 man pretending to be a woman, the voyeurism and indecent exposure by "Rose", the Darlington nurse and so on. One child claiming to be trans has been murdered in the U.K. A dreadful case. But the far greater number of sexual assaults by men claiming to be trans against women and girls - look up the latest MoJ figures - never ever bother you, a so-called male feminist ally.
Survation Holyrood Constituency vote SNP 37 Labour 20 Reform 18 Con 11 LD 7 Green 5 Alba 1
List vote SNP 31 Lab 18 Reform 15 Con 13 LD 11 Green 8 Alba 2
SNP almost knocking on an outright majority. Impossible as it is for much of PB to comprehend they’ve had a good few weeks if you ignore BBC Scotland headlines. Will Your Party get their act together before next May? I think not but if they did and came out with an indy curious offer they might do okay, ie a seat or two. Lot of ifs there of course.
Are they not about to get a second hand kicking re trans when Sandie Peggie wins bigly in her claim against Fife NHS (and indirectly the Scottish Governments ludicrous Trans policies)?
No idea, I leave that stuff to the toilet monitors.
I wonder if @turbotubbs is expecting to be one of the "Are you female?" toilet inspectors?
I'm not expecting any toilet inspectors. I am hoping that women will be allowed single sex spaces away from ALL men, including those who believe that they are women, and those who fantasize that they are women. Including those with all male genitalia, currently trying to impregnate their girlfriend and expecting women to change alongside them (see Durham).
If you don't believe in the right of women to have single sex spaces then you don't believe in women's rights.
Really? There are a lot of pro-trans feminists who you think don't believe in women's rights, then.
Let me ask a question: why should someone who has been through full gender transition for decades, and has been using women's facilities for those decades, now have to use male, or disabled if available, facilities? What has changed?
The law has been clarified. Men CANNOT become women by surgery, by fairy dust, by will power.
I have every sympathy for transwomen. And they have the same rights as everyone else, but just as they cannot become a horse they cannot become a woman.
Hang on a sec, that's not what the court said. They said that, for the purposes of the Equality Act, a person could not change their sex. But the Equality Act also states that a person should not be discriminated against on the basis of their transgender identity.
So it's not as simple as saying that, "trans women are men," just as it was never as simple as saying that, "trans women are women."
The Equality Act does not say that. Gender identity is not a protected characteristic. It is gender reassignment which is a defined term.
If you're XY, you're a guy. If you're XX, you're of the fairer sex.
It seems there are three groups here. Those that are ideologically opposed to ID cards. Those that support ID cards. Those that are theoretically in favour, but know that any system we introduce will be gold plated, hideously expensive, badly implemented by someone like Fujitsu, managed on the cheap by some private foreign company that sells or loses the data, and won’t believe that the system isn’t infallible, despite evidence from many individual cases. I suspect this will be the largest group.
Palantir, not Fujitsu, so the malign rather than the incompetent...
That is an absolutely key issue here. Who worse could the government find to do 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.
It's no more hostile, we already are fully hostile to it.
Anyone hiring anyone legally is already checking ID. Every legitimate employer does it.
Crooks don't. This will do nothing to stop people from being crooks.
I didn’t say that it would stop people from being crooks. You’re arguing with yourself.
No, I'm arguing with you.
If it doesn't stop people from being crooks, it doesn't help, since it is crooks who are hiring people illegally already.
But it's not stop/not stop. Becuase nothing will stop crooks completely- but that's not a reason not to have any crime prevention.
The boring question is twofold;
First, will having a single reference point for ID make it easier to do the currently mandated checks, and (more interestingly), will it make it more practical to catch the crooks not doing so and to prove their crookedness?
Second, is a single system for ID worse for civil liberties than the current situation? In practice, most of us have one or more sort-of-ID cards (passport, driving licence etc) and plenty of other systems piggyback on them, so there are quite a few bits of civic life that are a PITA-to-impossible if you don't have something to show.
Most things are shades of grey, and the question is what shade we prefer. And that is a hill that I'm willing to be moderately ill midway up.
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.
All linked back to a unique iris scan
Iris says she's unique, but how come everyone has her scan?
1. How can Burnham challenge Starmer when he's not an MP? With Labour polling around 20% on average, a by election, even in Bootle would be "brave" to say the least?
2. Is the ID cards thing a dead cat moment? And anyway, even if they did legislate for it, can the government really set up a major IT project like ID cards in 4 years? Obviously Labour will be booted out in 2029 so I can't see this happening (unless an incoming Ref government continues with the policy?
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.
All linked back to a unique iris scan
Iris says she's unique, but how come everyone has her scan?
When everything's made to be broken, I just want you to know who I am.
Is this the first poll since the election that has the Lib Dems ahead of the Tories? Three observations;
1.The tone of the Lib Dem Conference hit the right tone. In this time of some grotesque political Parties I thought they got it spot on . 2. Rather than Starmer being worried about the knife in the back shouldn't it be Kemi?
3. It's Findoutnow which is so far away from the crowd that it's difficult to take it too seriously
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.
All linked back to a unique iris scan
Iris says she's unique, but how come everyone has her scan?
She teaches many pupils?
I can see what you did there. The joke couldn't be cornea.
It seems there are three groups here. Those that are ideologically opposed to ID cards. Those that support ID cards. Those that are theoretically in favour, but know that any system we introduce will be gold plated, hideously expensive, badly implemented by someone like Fujitsu, managed on the cheap by some private foreign company that sells or loses the data, and won’t believe that the system isn’t infallible, despite evidence from many individual cases. I suspect this will be the largest group.
I'm only prepared to back ID cards if it guaranteed Fujitsu is running the programme.
aJust imagine, you could have to input your govt ID before every social media comment
Would make life a lot easier for the Twitter police
Not really, with that amount of information they would tidy up the twitter crimes in no time and then have to go and do some real police work.
Removing wee neds ID cards for a week after they are caught shoplifting, riding illegal e-bikes, etc, would at least get them off a streets for a short time, as long as the police asked to see their ID as soon as they were spotted. Each time they are caught, double the time their ID cards are removed.
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?
You think the government already knows everything about you? I hope not.
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.
All linked back to a unique iris scan
Iris says she's unique, but how come everyone has her scan?
She teaches many pupils?
I can see what you did there. The joke couldn't be cornea.
1. How can Burnham challenge Starmer when he's not an MP? With Labour polling around 20% on average a by election, even in Bootle would be "brave" to ⁷say the least?
2. Is the ID cards things a dead cat moment? And anyway, even if they did legislate for it, can the government really set up a major IT project li2ke ID cards in 4 years? Obviously Labour will be booted out in 2029 so I can't see this happening (unless an incoming Ref government continues with the policy?
The deal was done with Palantir only a week ago, so I expect they think they can use their huge resources and experience to get things like this done quickly.
Is this the first poll since the election that has the Lib Dems ahead of the Tories? Three observations;
1.The tone of the Lib Dem Conference hit the right tone. In this time of some grotesque political Parties I thought they got it spot on . 2. Rather than Starmer being worried about the knife in the back shouldn't it be Kemi?
3. It's Findoutnow which is so far away from the crowd that it's difficult to take it too seriously
FindOutNow was the first pollster to put Reform above 25% and they turned out to be right because all the other pollsters followed a while later.
It seems there are three groups here. Those that are ideologically opposed to ID cards. Those that support ID cards. Those that are theoretically in favour, but know that any system we introduce will be gold plated, hideously expensive, badly implemented by someone like Fujitsu, managed on the cheap by some private foreign company that sells or loses the data, and won’t believe that the system isn’t infallible, despite evidence from many individual cases. I suspect this will be the largest group.
Palantir, not Fujitsu, so the malign rather than the incompetent...
Sir Keir is certainly playing high-risk politics with his ID cards. However, it could well split the Reform coalition asunder, which I'm sure is Sir Keir's devious intention.
The thing is ID cards are very popular with the public.
Never re-opening nightclubs which had closed over Covid was very popular with the public. What the fuck do they know.
I don't love the idea of the database behind ID cards but there are so many databases which we contribute to/populate with everything digital we do these days one more probably won't be the end of the world.
There is a huge difference between a database held by a private company and one held by a government which has the power to arrest and imprison you.
And which has a track record of miscarriages of justice and fucking up every database it has ever been involved in.
A simpleton should be able to see the difference. And you don't strike me as a simpleton.
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.
All linked back to a unique iris scan
Iris says she's unique, but how come everyone has her scan?
She teaches many pupils?
I can see what you did there. The joke couldn't be cornea.
It seems there are three groups here. Those that are ideologically opposed to ID cards. Those that support ID cards. Those that are theoretically in favour, but know that any system we introduce will be gold plated, hideously expensive, badly implemented by someone like Fujitsu, managed on the cheap by some private foreign company that sells or loses the data, and won’t believe that the system isn’t infallible, despite evidence from many individual cases. I suspect this will be the largest group.
Palantir, not Fujitsu, so the malign rather than the incompetent...
1. How can Burnham challenge Starmer when he's not an MP? With Labour polling around 20% on average, a by election, even in Bootle would be "brave" to say the least?
2. Is the ID cards thing a dead cat moment? And anyway, even if they did legislate for it, can the government really set up a major IT project like ID cards in 4 years? Obviously Labour will be booted out in 2029 so I can't see this happening (unless an incoming Ref government continues with the policy?
Good comment. It's a distraction from all the Starmer woes ahead of the Labour conference. It will get half done at great expense and will then be cancelled. You can see it coming.
Sir Keir is certainly playing high-risk politics with his ID cards. However, it could well split the Reform coalition asunder, which I'm sure is Sir Keir's devious intention.
The thing is ID cards are very popular with the public.
Never re-opening nightclubs which had closed over Covid was very popular with the public. What the fuck do they know.
I don't love the idea of the database behind ID cards but there are so many databases which we contribute to/populate with everything digital we do these days one more probably won't be the end of the world.
There is a huge difference between a database held by a private company and one held by a government which has the power to arrest and imprison you.
And which has a track record of miscarriages of justice and fucking up every database it has ever been involved in.
A simpleton should be able to see the difference. And you don't strike me as a simpleton.
And there"s even more difference again between that and entire integrated government databases accessible by private companies. which is what people like Thiel and Andreesen even publicly aspire to, as the basis for their techno-fiefs, and "seasteads".
It seems there are three groups here. Those that are ideologically opposed to ID cards. Those that support ID cards. Those that are theoretically in favour, but know that any system we introduce will be gold plated, hideously expensive, badly implemented by someone like Fujitsu, managed on the cheap by some private foreign company that sells or loses the data, and won’t believe that the system isn’t infallible, despite evidence from many individual cases. I suspect this will be the largest group.
Palantir, not Fujitsu, so the malign rather than the incompetent...
I’m sure there will be opportunities for both.
Starmer is malign AND incompetent??
Yup. And I think he has a mental condition as well.
When we onboard new clients we are required to ask them to take a photo of their passport and themselves and upload it to a third party app which then checks the details and also cross references sanctions lists, etc. These databases already exist. It’s totally naive to think otherwise.
Do you really think these types of databases actually achieve anything?
It seems there are three groups here. Those that are ideologically opposed to ID cards. Those that support ID cards. Those that are theoretically in favour, but know that any system we introduce will be gold plated, hideously expensive, badly implemented by someone like Fujitsu, managed on the cheap by some private foreign company that sells or loses the data, and won’t believe that the system isn’t infallible, despite evidence from many individual cases. I suspect this will be the largest group.
I'm only prepared to back ID cards if it guaranteed Fujitsu is running the programme.
Fujitsu already runs a National ID database.
The one that decides who they let in at border control
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.
It's no more hostile, we already are fully hostile to it.
Anyone hiring anyone legally is already checking ID. Every legitimate employer does it.
Crooks don't. This will do nothing to stop people from being crooks.
I didn’t say that it would stop people from being crooks. You’re arguing with yourself.
No, I'm arguing with you.
If it doesn't stop people from being crooks, it doesn't help, since it is crooks who are hiring people illegally already.
But it's not stop/not stop. Becuase nothing will stop crooks completely- but that's not a reason not to have any crime prevention.
The boring question is twofold;
First, will having a single reference point for ID make it easier to do the currently mandated checks, and (more interestingly), will it make it more practical to catch the crooks not doing so and to prove their crookedness?
Second, is a single system for ID worse for civil liberties than the current situation? In practice, most of us have one or more sort-of-ID cards (passport, driving licence etc) and plenty of other systems piggyback on them, so there are quite a few bits of civic life that are a PITA-to-impossible if you don't have something to show.
Most things are shades of grey, and the question is what shade we prefer. And that is a hill that I'm willing to be moderately ill midway up.
If no-one is enforcing the 'thou shalt not employ XYZ person' legislation as it is - I'm not sure how an ID system helps. Unless there's also some sort of mandated 'You have to scan their QR code and get a green check before you employ them'. But even then - it's not going to stop the deliveroo 'pass on your gig to someone else' or just outright cash-in-hand cowboys.
Seems like an eye-wateringly expensive headline-grab to me.
It seems there are three groups here. Those that are ideologically opposed to ID cards. Those that support ID cards. Those that are theoretically in favour, but know that any system we introduce will be gold plated, hideously expensive, badly implemented by someone like Fujitsu, managed on the cheap by some private foreign company that sells or loses the data, and won’t believe that the system isn’t infallible, despite evidence from many individual cases. I suspect this will be the largest group.
Palantir, not Fujitsu, so the malign rather than the incompetent...
I’m sure there will be opportunities for both.
Starmer is malign AND incompetent??
Yup. And I think he has a mental condition as well.
There really is no limit of what he will do to suck up to Trump, is there?
They should also add that universal digital ID is handing a future authoritarian/fascist government a mighty handy tool.
This is the reason I am still unconvinced, especially given the current direction of travel of western democracies.
I was implacably opposed to ID when Blair was around for the reasons given in that piece.*
Not to do a Leon and start name dropping but I once interviewed Richard Stallman about the plans for a very minor publication many moons ago.
* Edit: Indeed, I may still have a "No ID' t-shirt from the time in a box under the eaves somewhere.
Imagine the people likely to be deported under Farage's plans giving their details to the government to make it easier for them to be rounded up and deported. It is such a stupidly malicious idea that only an idiot like Starmer would do 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.
It's no more hostile, we already are fully hostile to it.
Anyone hiring anyone legally is already checking ID. Every legitimate employer does it.
Crooks don't. This will do nothing to stop people from being crooks.
I didn’t say that it would stop people from being crooks. You’re arguing with yourself.
No, I'm arguing with you.
If it doesn't stop people from being crooks, it doesn't help, since it is crooks who are hiring people illegally already.
But it's not stop/not stop. Becuase nothing will stop crooks completely- but that's not a reason not to have any crime prevention.
The boring question is twofold;
First, will having a single reference point for ID make it easier to do the currently mandated checks, and (more interestingly), will it make it more practical to catch the crooks not doing so and to prove their crookedness?
Second, is a single system for ID worse for civil liberties than the current situation? In practice, most of us have one or more sort-of-ID cards (passport, driving licence etc) and plenty of other systems piggyback on them, so there are quite a few bits of civic life that are a PITA-to-impossible if you don't have something to show.
Most things are shades of grey, and the question is what shade we prefer. And that is a hill that I'm willing to be moderately ill midway up.
If no-one is enforcing the 'thou shalt not employ XYZ person' legislation as it is - I'm not sure how an ID system helps. Unless there's also some sort of mandated 'You have to scan their QR code and get a green check before you employ them'. But even then - it's not going to stop the deliveroo 'pass on your gig to someone else' or just outright cash-in-hand cowboys.
Seems like an eye-wateringly expensive headline-grab to me.
You don’t have ID? That’s a shame. We will just have to pay you in cash. However, due to the extra admin, we can’t afford to pay you the minimum wage.
What an absolutely pathetic joke that Labour aren't doing anything in their manifesto, such as getting homes built, but are going to introduce ID cards digital ID which was not in the manifesto.
It will do absolutely Jack Shit to deal with those who pay cash in hand to those working illegally too, as existing laws are already breached for that.
"You have given us a clear mandate and we will use it to deliver change. To restore service and respect to politics, end the era of noisy performance, tread more lightly on your lives."
aJust imagine, you could have to input your govt ID before every social media comment
So shall we take it Grant Shapps, Michael Green, Corinne Stockheath and Sebastian Fox will all be against it?
I think you'll find that there are excellent reasons that MP's are exempt from having to use it. And some of their friends. And their spouses. And someone who donated 'to the cause'. And .....
1. How can Burnham challenge Starmer when he's not an MP? With Labour polling around 20% on average, a by election, even in Bootle would be "brave" to say the least?
2. Is the ID cards thing a dead cat moment? And anyway, even if they did legislate for it, can the government really set up a major IT project like ID cards in 4 years? Obviously Labour will be booted out in 2029 so I can't see this happening (unless an incoming Ref government continues with the policy?
Correct, this is a 'next government' policy. I'd assume 8-10 years to get the system functional enough to make the cards compulsory for employment. 4 years from now it'll still be sufficiently early in development for an incoming administration to scrap it. The usual consultants will make out like bandits, though, which is not an accidental outcome.
But one never knows for sure. Wealthy organisations like Palantir would very much like such a system to exist, we don't know what kind of leverage they can apply to an incoming government.
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 .
Not everyone has a smart phone or a driving licence. And my passport and driving licence remain at home. Can't remember the last time I used them. So no I am not tracked on a continuous basis by the state.
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.
I understand that one of the Baltic States has a world-leading digital ID system.
The difference with previous British proposals, if my understanding is correct, it's that the Estonian system exists solely to verify your identity. The system Blair wanted to introduce, and that the civil service dust off at regular intervals, would consolidate all the data government holds on citizens into one system, and then make that data available to everyone with access to the system.
At present someone at your GP will have access to your GP's medical records, someone at DWP will have access to your history of social security claims and national insurance contributions, someone at HMRC will have access to your tax records, someone at the DVLA will be able to see penalty points on your driving licence - but the proposals normally end up in allowing all of them access to all of your data.
Survation Holyrood Constituency vote SNP 37 Labour 20 Reform 18 Con 11 LD 7 Green 5 Alba 1
List vote SNP 31 Lab 18 Reform 15 Con 13 LD 11 Green 8 Alba 2
SNP almost knocking on an outright majority. Impossible as it is for much of PB to comprehend they’ve had a good few weeks if you ignore BBC Scotland headlines. Will Your Party get their act together before next May? I think not but if they did and came out with an indy curious offer they might do okay, ie a seat or two. Lot of ifs there of course.
Are they not about to get a second hand kicking re trans when Sandie Peggie wins bigly in her claim against Fife NHS (and indirectly the Scottish Governments ludicrous Trans policies)?
No idea, I leave that stuff to the toilet monitors.
I wonder if @turbotubbs is expecting to be one of the "Are you female?" toilet inspectors?
I'm not expecting any toilet inspectors. I am hoping that women will be allowed single sex spaces away from ALL men, including those who believe that they are women, and those who fantasize that they are women. Including those with all male genitalia, currently trying to impregnate their girlfriend and expecting women to change alongside them (see Durham).
If you don't believe in the right of women to have single sex spaces then you don't believe in women's rights.
Really? There are a lot of pro-trans feminists who you think don't believe in women's rights, then.
Let me ask a question: why should someone who has been through full gender transition for decades, and has been using women's facilities for those decades, now have to use male, or disabled if available, facilities? What has changed?
The law has been clarified. Men CANNOT become women by surgery, by fairy dust, by will power.
I have every sympathy for transwomen. And they have the same rights as everyone else, but just as they cannot become a horse they cannot become a woman.
You don't show much sympathy.
In what way? I would treat (and have done) a trans person the same as any other. I simply do not believe that you can change sex/gender or whatever you want to call it. The debate is ridiculous.
I note that the UN has deemed that trans is not a mental illness (no doubt after significant pressure from pro trans lobbying). Yet body dysmorphia is still a mental illness.
I do not seek to tell anyone who to live their lives, who they can have sex with, how they can dress. I merely wish the law respected and that women's single sex spaces remain for women, not for anyone who the law regards as a man.
A you know what - this is a dangerous thing to say. People have been hounded out of work because of this belief.
And trans people have been hounded to suicide and worse through bullying. And even murdered. I have witnessed the bullying this myself with trans friends and colleagues.
As ever you ignore the serious criminal offences committed against women and children by people claiming to be trans - 3 founders of Pride convicted or under investigation for child sexual abuse, a girl kidnapped and repeatedly raped by a transgender man who had been trans for ages and ages, a 12 year old girl sexually assaulted by a 6 ft 2 man pretending to be a woman, the voyeurism and indecent exposure by "Rose", the Darlington nurse and so on. One child claiming to be trans has been murdered in the U.K. A dreadful case. But the far greater number of sexual assaults by men claiming to be trans against women and girls - look up the latest MoJ figures - never ever bother you, a so-called male feminist ally.
Survation Holyrood Constituency vote SNP 37 Labour 20 Reform 18 Con 11 LD 7 Green 5 Alba 1
List vote SNP 31 Lab 18 Reform 15 Con 13 LD 11 Green 8 Alba 2
SNP almost knocking on an outright majority. Impossible as it is for much of PB to comprehend they’ve had a good few weeks if you ignore BBC Scotland headlines. Will Your Party get their act together before next May? I think not but if they did and came out with an indy curious offer they might do okay, ie a seat or two. Lot of ifs there of course.
Are they not about to get a second hand kicking re trans when Sandie Peggie wins bigly in her claim against Fife NHS (and indirectly the Scottish Governments ludicrous Trans policies)?
No idea, I leave that stuff to the toilet monitors.
I wonder if @turbotubbs is expecting to be one of the "Are you female?" toilet inspectors?
I'm not expecting any toilet inspectors. I am hoping that women will be allowed single sex spaces away from ALL men, including those who believe that they are women, and those who fantasize that they are women. Including those with all male genitalia, currently trying to impregnate their girlfriend and expecting women to change alongside them (see Durham).
If you don't believe in the right of women to have single sex spaces then you don't believe in women's rights.
Really? There are a lot of pro-trans feminists who you think don't believe in women's rights, then.
Let me ask a question: why should someone who has been through full gender transition for decades, and has been using women's facilities for those decades, now have to use male, or disabled if available, facilities? What has changed?
The law has been clarified. Men CANNOT become women by surgery, by fairy dust, by will power.
I have every sympathy for transwomen. And they have the same rights as everyone else, but just as they cannot become a horse they cannot become a woman.
Hang on a sec, that's not what the court said. They said that, for the purposes of the Equality Act, a person could not change their sex. But the Equality Act also states that a person should not be discriminated against on the basis of their transgender identity.
So it's not as simple as saying that, "trans women are men," just as it was never as simple as saying that, "trans women are women."
The Equality Act does not say that. Gender identity is not a protected characteristic. It is gender reassignment which is a defined term.
There's a lot to be said about that, although it would help if you blockquoted individual topics rather than bundling them up. Oh, and I wouldn't mind PMing you, so it'd be good if you could not have a private profile.
But here's one point I'd like to strongly make:
"One child claiming to be trans" Brianna Ghey was trans. She did not 'claim' to be trans. She was.
There's much more, but I've got stuff to do before bed.
1. How can Burnham challenge Starmer when he's not an MP? With Labour polling around 20% on average a by election, even in Bootle would be "brave" to ⁷say the least?
2. Is the ID cards things a dead cat moment? And anyway, even if they did legislate for it, can the government really set up a major IT project li2ke ID cards in 4 years? Obviously Labour will be booted out in 2029 so I can't see this happening (unless an incoming Ref government continues with the policy?
The deal was done with Palantir only a week ago, so I expect they think they can use their huge resources and experience to get things like this done quickly.
Hugely financed company with previous experience and being able to do the job quickly sounds like they'll pass on those cost-savings! Hurrah!
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?
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.
It's no more hostile, we already are fully hostile to it.
Anyone hiring anyone legally is already checking ID. Every legitimate employer does it.
Crooks don't. This will do nothing to stop people from being crooks.
I didn’t say that it would stop people from being crooks. You’re arguing with yourself.
That isn't always the issue. A good friend of mine an Italian who had a coffee bar restaurant was raided one Saturday night and out of about six staff one was found to have false papers. My friend was fined £15,000 and was forced to close shortly after. The employee was a Venezualan and he was only emplyed as a washer-upper on Saturday night. It was an outrage,
He had not knowingly done anything wrong. How was he supposed to know that the permit was false? I leant him half of it but there was no way out. There was no appeal and if he didn't pay it in a given amount of time it was increased to £25,000
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.
All linked back to a unique iris scan
Iris says she's unique, but how come everyone has her scan?
She teaches many pupils?
I can see what you did there. The joke couldn't be cornea.
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?
They don’t have a single, easy to search list of everyone in the country.
Now what could go wrong with a list of where all the various kind of migrants live? In the hands of Reform run councils (under the Home Office plan, councils will have full access)?
Data processing by Palantir and Peter Fucking Thiel?
Strangely, every other country in the world, that has ID cards, doesn’t have that.
Survation Holyrood Constituency vote SNP 37 Labour 20 Reform 18 Con 11 LD 7 Green 5 Alba 1
List vote SNP 31 Lab 18 Reform 15 Con 13 LD 11 Green 8 Alba 2
SNP almost knocking on an outright majority. Impossible as it is for much of PB to comprehend they’ve had a good few weeks if you ignore BBC Scotland headlines. Will Your Party get their act together before next May? I think not but if they did and came out with an indy curious offer they might do okay, ie a seat or two. Lot of ifs there of course.
Are they not about to get a second hand kicking re trans when Sandie Peggie wins bigly in her claim against Fife NHS (and indirectly the Scottish Governments ludicrous Trans policies)?
No idea, I leave that stuff to the toilet monitors.
I wonder if @turbotubbs is expecting to be one of the "Are you female?" toilet inspectors?
I'm not expecting any toilet inspectors. I am hoping that women will be allowed single sex spaces away from ALL men, including those who believe that they are women, and those who fantasize that they are women. Including those with all male genitalia, currently trying to impregnate their girlfriend and expecting women to change alongside them (see Durham).
If you don't believe in the right of women to have single sex spaces then you don't believe in women's rights.
Really? There are a lot of pro-trans feminists who you think don't believe in women's rights, then.
Let me ask a question: why should someone who has been through full gender transition for decades, and has been using women's facilities for those decades, now have to use male, or disabled if available, facilities? What has changed?
The law has been clarified. Men CANNOT become women by surgery, by fairy dust, by will power.
I have every sympathy for transwomen. And they have the same rights as everyone else, but just as they cannot become a horse they cannot become a woman.
You don't show much sympathy.
In what way? I would treat (and have done) a trans person the same as any other. I simply do not believe that you can change sex/gender or whatever you want to call it. The debate is ridiculous.
I note that the UN has deemed that trans is not a mental illness (no doubt after significant pressure from pro trans lobbying). Yet body dysmorphia is still a mental illness.
I do not seek to tell anyone who to live their lives, who they can have sex with, how they can dress. I merely wish the law respected and that women's single sex spaces remain for women, not for anyone who the law regards as a man.
A you know what - this is a dangerous thing to say. People have been hounded out of work because of this belief.
And trans people have been hounded to suicide and worse through bullying. And even murdered. I have witnessed the bullying this myself with trans friends and colleagues.
As ever you ignore the serious criminal offences committed against women and children by people claiming to be trans - 3 founders of Pride convicted or under investigation for child sexual abuse, a girl kidnapped and repeatedly raped by a transgender man who had been trans for ages and ages, a 12 year old girl sexually assaulted by a 6 ft 2 man pretending to be a woman, the voyeurism and indecent exposure by "Rose", the Darlington nurse and so on. One child claiming to be trans has been murdered in the U.K. A dreadful case. But the far greater number of sexual assaults by men claiming to be trans against women and girls - look up the latest MoJ figures - never ever bother you, a so-called male feminist ally.
Survation Holyrood Constituency vote SNP 37 Labour 20 Reform 18 Con 11 LD 7 Green 5 Alba 1
List vote SNP 31 Lab 18 Reform 15 Con 13 LD 11 Green 8 Alba 2
SNP almost knocking on an outright majority. Impossible as it is for much of PB to comprehend they’ve had a good few weeks if you ignore BBC Scotland headlines. Will Your Party get their act together before next May? I think not but if they did and came out with an indy curious offer they might do okay, ie a seat or two. Lot of ifs there of course.
Are they not about to get a second hand kicking re trans when Sandie Peggie wins bigly in her claim against Fife NHS (and indirectly the Scottish Governments ludicrous Trans policies)?
No idea, I leave that stuff to the toilet monitors.
I wonder if @turbotubbs is expecting to be one of the "Are you female?" toilet inspectors?
I'm not expecting any toilet inspectors. I am hoping that women will be allowed single sex spaces away from ALL men, including those who believe that they are women, and those who fantasize that they are women. Including those with all male genitalia, currently trying to impregnate their girlfriend and expecting women to change alongside them (see Durham).
If you don't believe in the right of women to have single sex spaces then you don't believe in women's rights.
Really? There are a lot of pro-trans feminists who you think don't believe in women's rights, then.
Let me ask a question: why should someone who has been through full gender transition for decades, and has been using women's facilities for those decades, now have to use male, or disabled if available, facilities? What has changed?
The law has been clarified. Men CANNOT become women by surgery, by fairy dust, by will power.
I have every sympathy for transwomen. And they have the same rights as everyone else, but just as they cannot become a horse they cannot become a woman.
Hang on a sec, that's not what the court said. They said that, for the purposes of the Equality Act, a person could not change their sex. But the Equality Act also states that a person should not be discriminated against on the basis of their transgender identity.
So it's not as simple as saying that, "trans women are men," just as it was never as simple as saying that, "trans women are women."
The Equality Act does not say that. Gender identity is not a protected characteristic. It is gender reassignment which is a defined term.
There's a lot to be said about that, although it would help if you blockquoted individual topics rather than bundling them up. Oh, and I wouldn't mind PMing you, so it'd be good if you could not have a private profile.
But here's one point I'd like to strongly make:
"One child claiming to be trans" Brianna Ghey was trans. She did not 'claim' to be trans. She was.
There's much more, but I've got stuff to do before bed.
He was a child. He had gender dysphoria. He believed that he ought to be a girl. What the Cass Report and the evidence from the GIDS clinic at the Tavistock clinic shows that some children with this condition grow out of it, for some it is caused by other factors and so on. It is a condition but is not necessarily a final diagnosis which is why it is important to understand exactly what lies behind it rather than assuming that what a child says is the final definitive word.
Very sadly this did not happen here because of the awful murder. There was in this child's case, having seen some of the evidence and the very curious response by the Head Teacher at the school (since deleted) a real safeguarding issue both for this child and the two killers and that this was not handled at all as it should have been. If it had, perhaps the poor child would still be alive.
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.
1. How can Burnham challenge Starmer when he's not an MP? With Labour polling around 20% on average, a by election, even in Bootle would be "brave" to say the least?
2. Is the ID cards thing a dead cat moment? And anyway, even if they did legislate for it, can the government really set up a major IT project like ID cards in 4 years? Obviously Labour will be booted out in 2029 so I can't see this happening (unless an incoming Ref government continues with the policy?
1. Labour Party rule change? There's no reason why a party leader has to be in the Commons, indeed "small" parties don't require this.
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.
I understand that one of the Baltic States has a world-leading digital ID system.
The difference with previous British proposals, if my understanding is correct, it's that the Estonian system exists solely to verify your identity. The system Blair wanted to introduce, and that the civil service dust off at regular intervals, would consolidate all the data government holds on citizens into one system, and then make that data available to everyone with access to the system.
At present someone at your GP will have access to your GP's medical records, someone at DWP will have access to your history of social security claims and national insurance contributions, someone at HMRC will have access to your tax records, someone at the DVLA will be able to see penalty points on your driving licence - but the proposals normally end up in allowing all of them access to all of your data.
No thanks.
The Estonian system restricts access to your data, which you own and effectively give permission for certain people to access via a security protocol called the X road. It is impossible to get past this sentry programme without using a digital ID so it leaves a trace. Nor is all your data in one place, so no compromised databases. It is critical that we move to digital systems and being able to prove you are human and get secure communication with those like doctors who need your data is not optional. Ed Davey got thus straightaway when he was here and he has followed up on it. Hague also gets it.
Everybody is fraught tonight, so here's something that's nice. As you know I went up on the Caledonian Sleeper from London to Edinburgh. It was great. Here is a video of somebody else's journey.
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.
It's no more hostile, we already are fully hostile to it.
Anyone hiring anyone legally is already checking ID. Every legitimate employer does it.
Crooks don't. This will do nothing to stop people from being crooks.
I didn’t say that it would stop people from being crooks. You’re arguing with yourself.
That isn't always the issue. A good friend of mine an Italian who had a coffee bar restaurant was raided one Saturday night and out of about six staff one was found to have false papers. My friend was fined £15,000 and was forced to close shortly after. The employee was a Venezualan and he was only emplyed as a washer-upper on Saturday night. It was an outrage,
He had not knowingly done anything wrong. How was he supposed to know that the permit was false? I leant him half of it but there was no way out. There was no appeal and if he didn't pay it in a given amount of time it was increased to £25,000
Fucksake Roger - ignorance of the law is no excuse and your friend broke the law. Next you will be saying that the ‘talent’ is entitled to a bit of sexual licence because they are special.
Everybody is fraught tonight, so here's something that's nice. As you know I went up on the Caledonian Sleeper from London to Edinburgh. It was great. Here is a video of somebody else's journey.
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.
It's no more hostile, we already are fully hostile to it.
Anyone hiring anyone legally is already checking ID. Every legitimate employer does it.
Crooks don't. This will do nothing to stop people from being crooks.
I didn’t say that it would stop people from being crooks. You’re arguing with yourself.
That isn't always the issue. A good friend of mine an Italian who had a coffee bar restaurant was raided one Saturday night and out of about six staff one was found to have false papers. My friend was fined £15,000 and was forced to close shortly after. The employee was a Venezualan and he was only emplyed as a washer-upper on Saturday night. It was an outrage,
He had not knowingly done anything wrong. How was he supposed to know that the permit was false? I leant him half of it but there was no way out. There was no appeal and if he didn't pay it in a given amount of time it was increased to £25,000
Fucksake Roger - ignorance of the law is no excuse and your friend broke the law. Next you will be saying that the ‘talent’ is entitled to a bit of sexual licence because they are special.
Yes, but he was an Italian. So therefore sophisticated. Keep up.
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?
He spent his day listening to his traders justifying the use of naughty words as free speech… probably
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.
it looks like every EU country bar one has them.Why do you believe they have all got it wrong? Or is it that our situation is different?
They don’t try and create a super database of everything and then allow any idiot to access it without proper logs. Or breach GDPR, good security standards, common sense or the laws of mathematics.
They don’t hire Peter Fucking Thiel
They generally have a simple card, with a single, simple database behind it.
This doesn’t justify a multi billion pound budget, a Richard Rogers inspired head office building or any other crap. I know that’s sad for some. They can go cry in corner.
They should also add that universal digital ID is handing a future authoritarian/fascist government a mighty handy tool.
This is the reason I am still unconvinced, especially given the current direction of travel of western democracies.
I was implacably opposed to ID when Blair was around for the reasons given in that piece.*
Not to do a Leon and start name dropping but I once interviewed Richard Stallman about the plans for a very minor publication many moons ago.
* Edit: Indeed, I may still have a "No ID' t-shirt from the time in a box under the eaves somewhere.
Imagine the people likely to be deported under Farage's plans giving their details to the government to make it easier for them to be rounded up and deported. It is such a stupidly malicious idea that only an idiot like Starmer would do it.
Farage has come out very clearly against it in last couple of hours.
"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."
When DARPA wants to commercialise something or it is too awkward to continue in house it *gives* the programme to a friendly third party. It’s one of the biggest hidden state subsidies in the tech/military world
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.
It's no more hostile, we already are fully hostile to it.
Anyone hiring anyone legally is already checking ID. Every legitimate employer does it.
Crooks don't. This will do nothing to stop people from being crooks.
I didn’t say that it would stop people from being crooks. You’re arguing with yourself.
That isn't always the issue. A good friend of mine an Italian who had a coffee bar restaurant was raided one Saturday night and out of about six staff one was found to have false papers. My friend was fined £15,000 and was forced to close shortly after. The employee was a Venezualan and he was only emplyed as a washer-upper on Saturday night. It was an outrage,
He had not knowingly done anything wrong. How was he supposed to know that the permit was false? I leant him half of it but there was no way out. There was no appeal and if he didn't pay it in a given amount of time it was increased to £25,000
Interesting story. That does seem quite harsh on your friend if there isnt some easy way to check whether a permit is legitimate.
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?!
1. How can Burnham challenge Starmer when he's not an MP? With Labour polling around 20% on average, a by election, even in Bootle would be "brave" to say the least?
2. Is the ID cards thing a dead cat moment? And anyway, even if they did legislate for it, can the government really set up a major IT project like ID cards in 4 years? Obviously Labour will be booted out in 2029 so I can't see this happening (unless an incoming Ref government continues with the policy?
1. Labour Party rule change? There's no reason why a party leader has to be in the Commons, indeed "small" parties don't require this.
Yes but Burnham would be PM. Pretty impossible nowadays to have a PM not in the Commons.
"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."
Why does the CIA have a venture capital arm??
A good friend of mine’s brother had a visit from In-Q-Tel. They told him they were taking a minority stake in his business.
He said “it’s not for sale”… they said “it is to us”.
He said “I’m moving the company to Germany” … they said “you won’t make it there”…
He now has a new 20% shareholder and is stuck in Boston
They should also add that universal digital ID is handing a future authoritarian/fascist government a mighty handy tool.
This is the reason I am still unconvinced, especially given the current direction of travel of western democracies.
I was implacably opposed to ID when Blair was around for the reasons given in that piece.*
Not to do a Leon and start name dropping but I once interviewed Richard Stallman about the plans for a very minor publication many moons ago.
* Edit: Indeed, I may still have a "No ID' t-shirt from the time in a box under the eaves somewhere.
Imagine the people likely to be deported under Farage's plans giving their details to the government to make it easier for them to be rounded up and deported. It is such a stupidly malicious idea that only an idiot like Starmer would do it.
Farage has come out very clearly against it in last couple of hours.
Clear purple water now with Labour.
The cynic in me suspects that if Labour hadn't proposed ID cards, it would have appeared in Reform's next manifesto. Farage: "We are introducing compulsory ID cards so that we can stop the boats, stop illegal working, identify those who are not entitled to public services because they are not British citizens, and deport those who have no entitlement to live here".
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
To quote Mr Franklin:
Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
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
To quote Mr Franklin:
Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
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 .
Not everyone has a smart phone or a driving licence. And my passport and driving licence remain at home. Can't remember the last time I used them. So no I am not tracked on a continuous basis by the state.
I used to be absolutely against ID cards until I move to Switzerland. Having the Carte des Etrangers/Ausslander Auschweiz (or something) was brilliant. Because you could only get it if you were an authenticated real person who had the right to live there it was all you needed for many things. It was better than a passport as it cut so many layers of crap when you were opening a bank account, changing your driving licence, proving who you were at the tax office etc it made life amazingly simple.
I never got stopped but had a doc that they trusted if the police and asked for my papers. I look like a typical Scandinavian so was less likely to but I was also part of a wide international group of friends and so, when the horribly racist Geneva police stopped my black or Asian (or frankly darker European friends) their ID card generally stopped it going to the point of them being arrested for looking a bit dark.
You couldn’t get a job without it, you couldn’t do anything technical without it and the only people who would have a problem with it being a requirement would be those whose interests were allied with allowing people who shouldn’t be in the country/ working to scoot around the law.
If you were an employer who employed someone without one then you got your deserts, you were a problem so deserved the punishment.
I can’t think of a reason why, if you are legally allowed to be in a country, working, using the resources, why you shouldn’t have a simple way of proving to anyone that you are ok.
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 .
Not everyone has a smart phone or a driving licence. And my passport and driving licence remain at home. Can't remember the last time I used them. So no I am not tracked on a continuous basis by the state.
I used to be absolutely against ID cards until I move to Switzerland. Having the Carte des Etrangers/Ausslander Auschweiz (or something) was brilliant. Because you could only get it if you were an authenticated real person who had the right to live there it was all you needed for many things. It was better than a passport as it cut so many layers of crap when you were opening a bank account, changing your driving licence, proving who you were at the tax office etc it made life amazingly simple.
I never got stopped but had a doc that they trusted if the police and asked for my papers. I look like a typical Scandinavian so was less likely to but I was also part of a wide international group of friends and so, when the horribly racist Geneva police stopped my black or Asian (or frankly darker European friends) their ID card generally stopped it going to the point of them being arrested for looking a bit dark.
You couldn’t get a job without it, you couldn’t do anything technical without it and the only people who would have a problem with it being a requirement would be those whose interests were allied with allowing people who shouldn’t be in the country/ working to scoot around the law.
If you were an employer who employed someone without one then you got your deserts, you were a problem so deserved the punishment.
I can’t think of a reason why, if you are legally allowed to be in a country, working, using the resources, why you shouldn’t have a simple way of proving to anyone that you are ok.
Because I didn't ask to be born here, and shouldn't have to prove it to anyone. Natural law, as it were.
Perhaps this is excessively nativist, but there we are.
Comments
Anyone hiring anyone legally is already checking ID. Every legitimate employer does it.
Crooks don't. This will do nothing to stop people from being crooks.
The common thread I see in pro-ID arguments is a belief the system will work as advertised and be used only for the stated purpose. Given the history of such projects that strikes me as misplaced faith on par with grown adults believing in the tooth fairy.
If it doesn't stop people from being crooks, it doesn't help, since it is crooks who are hiring people illegally already.
Nobody is hiring anyone illegally because of the difficulty in checking ID. They're doing so because then they can dodge taxes, minimum wage laws and other laws.
Needless to say, on those numbers, you’d imagine a “loveless landslide” for Nigel Farage and Reform.
Google knows me better than I know myself...
Those that are ideologically opposed to ID cards.
Those that support ID cards.
Those that are theoretically in favour, but know that any system we introduce will be gold plated, hideously expensive, badly implemented by someone like Fujitsu, managed on the cheap by some private foreign company that sells or loses the data, and won’t believe that the system isn’t infallible, despite evidence from many individual cases. I suspect this will be the largest group.
Maybe?
7% Reform
1% Labour
4% LDs
1% Fringe and nationalists
2% Do not vote
Ref 436
LD 68 (Official opposition)
Lab 57
SNP 46
Con 11
Grn 8
If you're XX, you're of the fairer sex.
The boring question is twofold;
First, will having a single reference point for ID make it easier to do the currently mandated checks, and (more interestingly), will it make it more practical to catch the crooks not doing so and to prove their crookedness?
Second, is a single system for ID worse for civil liberties than the current situation? In practice, most of us have one or more sort-of-ID cards (passport, driving licence etc) and plenty of other systems piggyback on them, so there are quite a few bits of civic life that are a PITA-to-impossible if you don't have something to show.
Most things are shades of grey, and the question is what shade we prefer. And that is a hill that I'm willing to be moderately ill midway up.
Couple of points on todays.
1. How can Burnham challenge Starmer when he's not an MP? With Labour polling around 20% on average, a by election, even in Bootle would be "brave" to say the least?
2. Is the ID cards thing a dead cat moment? And anyway, even if they did legislate for it, can the government really set up a major IT project like ID cards in 4 years? Obviously Labour will be booted out in 2029 so I can't see this happening (unless an incoming Ref government continues with the policy?
1.The tone of the Lib Dem Conference hit the right tone. In this time of some grotesque political Parties I thought they got it spot on .
2. Rather than Starmer being worried about the knife in the back shouldn't it be Kemi?
3. It's Findoutnow which is so far away from the crowd that it's difficult to take it too seriously
And which has a track record of miscarriages of justice and fucking up every database it has ever been involved in.
A simpleton should be able to see the difference. And you don't strike me as a simpleton.
It's a distraction from all the Starmer woes ahead of the Labour conference.
It will get half done at great expense and will then be cancelled.
You can see it coming.
The one that decides who they let in at border control
Seems like an eye-wateringly expensive headline-grab to me.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/crgewjwqqq4o
But one never knows for sure. Wealthy organisations like Palantir would very much like such a system to exist, we don't know what kind of leverage they can apply to an incoming government.
The difference with previous British proposals, if my understanding is correct, it's that the Estonian system exists solely to verify your identity. The system Blair wanted to introduce, and that the civil service dust off at regular intervals, would consolidate all the data government holds on citizens into one system, and then make that data available to everyone with access to the system.
At present someone at your GP will have access to your GP's medical records, someone at DWP will have access to your history of social security claims and national insurance contributions, someone at HMRC will have access to your tax records, someone at the DVLA will be able to see penalty points on your driving licence - but the proposals normally end up in allowing all of them access to all of your data.
No thanks.
But here's one point I'd like to strongly make:
"One child claiming to be trans"
Brianna Ghey was trans. She did not 'claim' to be trans. She was.
There's much more, but I've got stuff to do before bed.
He had not knowingly done anything wrong. How was he supposed to know that the permit was false? I leant him half of it but there was no way out. There was no appeal and if he didn't pay it in a given amount of time it was increased to £25,000
Now what could go wrong with a list of where all the various kind of migrants live? In the hands of Reform run councils (under the Home Office plan, councils will have full access)?
Data processing by Palantir and Peter Fucking Thiel?
Strangely, every other country in the world, that has ID cards, doesn’t have that.
Very sadly this did not happen here because of the awful murder. There was in this child's case, having seen some of the evidence and the very curious response by the Head Teacher at the school (since deleted) a real safeguarding issue both for this child and the two killers and that this was not handled at all as it should have been. If it had, perhaps the poor child would still be alive.
Allows easy checking if right to work. It works for companies that want to check.
The issue is the large number of companies that want to employ illegal labour.
Not ID cards
It is critical that we move to digital systems and being able to prove you are human and get secure communication with those like doctors who need your data is not optional.
Ed Davey got thus straightaway when he was here and he has followed up on it. Hague also gets it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7xsjZpUiVk0
They don’t hire Peter Fucking Thiel
They generally have a simple card, with a single, simple database behind it.
This doesn’t justify a multi billion pound budget, a Richard Rogers inspired head office building or any other crap. I know that’s sad for some. They can go cry in corner.
Clear purple water now with Labour.
@JohnRentoul
·
8m
Reminder: Labour members support ID cards by 57% to 30% (@Survation for @LabourList, 5-9 Aug)
https://x.com/JohnRentoul/status/1971306707868676308
That does seem quite harsh on your friend if there isnt some easy way to check whether a permit is legitimate.
He said “it’s not for sale”… they said “it is to us”.
He said “I’m moving the company to Germany” … they said “you won’t make it there”…
He now has a new 20% shareholder and is stuck in Boston
"We are introducing compulsory ID cards so that we can stop the boats, stop illegal working, identify those who are not entitled to public services because they are not British citizens, and deport those who have no entitlement to live here".
Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.
I never got stopped but had a doc that they trusted if the police and asked for my papers. I look like a typical Scandinavian so was less likely to but I was also part of a wide international group of friends and so, when the horribly racist Geneva police stopped my black or Asian (or frankly darker European friends) their ID card generally stopped it going to the point of them being arrested for looking a bit dark.
You couldn’t get a job without it, you couldn’t do anything technical without it and the only people who would have a problem with it being a requirement would be those whose interests were allied with allowing people who shouldn’t be in the country/ working to scoot around the law.
If you were an employer who employed someone without one then you got your deserts, you were a problem so deserved the punishment.
I can’t think of a reason why, if you are legally allowed to be in a country, working, using the resources, why you shouldn’t have a simple way of proving to anyone that you are ok.
Perhaps this is excessively nativist, but there we are.