Off topic: I'm not averse to a good moan on here about the state of the education system, so thought I should balance that out with a bit of praise.
My school had an INSET day yesterday. In times gone by these days would be crammed full of sessions focused on the senior leadership team members' pet projects or fads, which immediately get forgotten because noone has time to implement them.
Yesterday, aside from an hour where we discussed how to respond to the London riots (we have a very diverse student body) we were trusted to use the day to deal with all the backlog of tasks that always arise in September as a result of the new school year.
This was a really conscious choice on the school's part to reduce burnout amongst staff. It is something the headteacher has agency over, and is exactly the sort of thing that will stop our school, and the system as a whole, bleeding staff. I managed to pin down my line manager to meet, meaning that I am now enthusiastic about how I can move my role forward over the next few months.
More importantly, I sorted out an assessment for students that will mean we can make sure they're in the right class to prepare for their GCSEs, and give them and home a month's warning of the assessment, rather than springing it on them. The school's decision to reduce the crap they throw our way will have a tangible positive impact on our students' experience of preparing for their maths GCSE.
I'm impressed.
I went to a junior school yesterday which was a show put on for parents/grandparents. The kids were from 4-10 I think. Each group of about 40 or 50 were introduced and came onto a stage and then sang a few lines of a meaningful (woke) song they'd learnt. As you got to the older groups the hand and body movements became more in time with the song and each other.
I have to say I found it moving. They were all so nice and kind to each other and when they took us round their classrooms they were relaxed and confident and eager to show us what they'd done
But I couldn't help this gnawing question of how these beautiful bright young children without a prejudice in the world could have turned into those flag waving morons that turned out in London two Saturdays ago.
I'm not in sympathy with the themes of the march, but it's possible to be mild 90% of the time and still nurse passionate prejudices and resentment. If we write them all off as flag-waving morons we miss the point. A lot of people are emotional about politics on the rare occasions when they pay attention to it at all. The challenge is to engage that emotion positively without expecting them suddenly to subscribe to the Guardian.
We are a people who've been told we have no culture. To me the march looked like people who are seeking their roots, and remembering (in the visibility of Islam) that those roots are Christian.
I don't think that we have been told that we have no culture. Who on earth gave you that idea?
Not that culture is static, as shown by the flag wavers lining up for curry and pizza at food stalls after the march.
I also find the intolerance of minority cultures by the "fun with flags" brigade as much of a threat as the intolerance of the more extreme strands of Islam, Hinduism and Christianity. Accepting that neighbours live differently and not attempting to force them into line, is the sort of British culture that I am proud of.
Off topic: I'm not averse to a good moan on here about the state of the education system, so thought I should balance that out with a bit of praise.
My school had an INSET day yesterday. In times gone by these days would be crammed full of sessions focused on the senior leadership team members' pet projects or fads, which immediately get forgotten because noone has time to implement them.
Yesterday, aside from an hour where we discussed how to respond to the London riots (we have a very diverse student body) we were trusted to use the day to deal with all the backlog of tasks that always arise in September as a result of the new school year.
This was a really conscious choice on the school's part to reduce burnout amongst staff. It is something the headteacher has agency over, and is exactly the sort of thing that will stop our school, and the system as a whole, bleeding staff. I managed to pin down my line manager to meet, meaning that I am now enthusiastic about how I can move my role forward over the next few months.
More importantly, I sorted out an assessment for students that will mean we can make sure they're in the right class to prepare for their GCSEs, and give them and home a month's warning of the assessment, rather than springing it on them. The school's decision to reduce the crap they throw our way will have a tangible positive impact on our students' experience of preparing for their maths GCSE.
I'm impressed.
I went to a junior school yesterday which was a show put on for parents/grandparents. The kids were from 4-10 I think. Each group of about 40 or 50 were introduced and came onto a stage and then sang a few lines of a meaningful (woke) song they'd learnt. As you got to the older groups the hand and body movements became more in time with the song and each other.
I have to say I found it moving. They were all so nice and kind to each other and when they took us round their classrooms they were relaxed and confident and eager to show us what they'd done
But I couldn't help this gnawing question of how these beautiful bright young children without a prejudice in the world could have turned into those flag waving morons that turned out in London two Saturdays ago.
I'm not in sympathy with the themes of the march, but it's possible to be mild 90% of the time and still nurse passionate prejudices and resentment. If we write them all off as flag-waving morons we miss the point. A lot of people are emotional about politics on the rare occasions when they pay attention to it at all. The challenge is to engage that emotion positively without expecting them suddenly to subscribe to the Guardian.
We are a people who've been told we have no culture. To me the march looked like people who are seeking their roots, and remembering (in the visibility of Islam) that those roots are Christian.
Our cultural roots are strongly intertwined with Christianity, but there are a lot of other sources too.
Half the world's cultures are strongly intertwined with Christianity. It hardly is a unique feature of ours, unless there is no difference between us and Zambia or Armenia.
On the subject of Russia I see they’re now busy manufacturing a crisis at Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant to extort something or other. One more confirmation Putin’s mob are an organised crime syndicate posing as a national government.
Off topic: I'm not averse to a good moan on here about the state of the education system, so thought I should balance that out with a bit of praise.
My school had an INSET day yesterday. In times gone by these days would be crammed full of sessions focused on the senior leadership team members' pet projects or fads, which immediately get forgotten because noone has time to implement them.
Yesterday, aside from an hour where we discussed how to respond to the London riots (we have a very diverse student body) we were trusted to use the day to deal with all the backlog of tasks that always arise in September as a result of the new school year.
This was a really conscious choice on the school's part to reduce burnout amongst staff. It is something the headteacher has agency over, and is exactly the sort of thing that will stop our school, and the system as a whole, bleeding staff. I managed to pin down my line manager to meet, meaning that I am now enthusiastic about how I can move my role forward over the next few months.
More importantly, I sorted out an assessment for students that will mean we can make sure they're in the right class to prepare for their GCSEs, and give them and home a month's warning of the assessment, rather than springing it on them. The school's decision to reduce the crap they throw our way will have a tangible positive impact on our students' experience of preparing for their maths GCSE.
I'm impressed.
I went to a junior school yesterday which was a show put on for parents/grandparents. The kids were from 4-10 I think. Each group of about 40 or 50 were introduced and came onto a stage and then sang a few lines of a meaningful (woke) song they'd learnt. As you got to the older groups the hand and body movements became more in time with the song and each other.
I have to say I found it moving. They were all so nice and kind to each other and when they took us round their classrooms they were relaxed and confident and eager to show us what they'd done
But I couldn't help this gnawing question of how these beautiful bright young children without a prejudice in the world could have turned into those flag waving morons that turned out in London two Saturdays ago.
I'm not in sympathy with the themes of the march, but it's possible to be mild 90% of the time and still nurse passionate prejudices and resentment. If we write them all off as flag-waving morons we miss the point. A lot of people are emotional about politics on the rare occasions when they pay attention to it at all. The challenge is to engage that emotion positively without expecting them suddenly to subscribe to the Guardian.
We are a people who've been told we have no culture. To me the march looked like people who are seeking their roots, and remembering (in the visibility of Islam) that those roots are Christian.
Our cultural roots are strongly intertwined with Christianity, but there are a lot of other sources too.
Indeed, and we can be proud of having led the way towards rejection of such superstitious nonsense, firstly by inventing our own Christianity-lite where adherents only have to pretend, and then by abandoning even that.
That's where the aphorism about "you don't believe in nothing, you believe in anything" has at least a kernel of truth.
Organised religions have a lot wrong with them. Most of their adherents come nowhere near living up to their ideals. We know this.
However, weak tea 'wouldn't it be good if everyone tried being nicer to each other' has definite advantages over what tends to fill its space. It's very hard, for example, to reconcile the actions of the current manifestation of Christian Nationalism with the recorded attitudes of Christ.
Off topic: I'm not averse to a good moan on here about the state of the education system, so thought I should balance that out with a bit of praise.
My school had an INSET day yesterday. In times gone by these days would be crammed full of sessions focused on the senior leadership team members' pet projects or fads, which immediately get forgotten because noone has time to implement them.
Yesterday, aside from an hour where we discussed how to respond to the London riots (we have a very diverse student body) we were trusted to use the day to deal with all the backlog of tasks that always arise in September as a result of the new school year.
This was a really conscious choice on the school's part to reduce burnout amongst staff. It is something the headteacher has agency over, and is exactly the sort of thing that will stop our school, and the system as a whole, bleeding staff. I managed to pin down my line manager to meet, meaning that I am now enthusiastic about how I can move my role forward over the next few months.
More importantly, I sorted out an assessment for students that will mean we can make sure they're in the right class to prepare for their GCSEs, and give them and home a month's warning of the assessment, rather than springing it on them. The school's decision to reduce the crap they throw our way will have a tangible positive impact on our students' experience of preparing for their maths GCSE.
I'm impressed.
I went to a junior school yesterday which was a show put on for parents/grandparents. The kids were from 4-10 I think. Each group of about 40 or 50 were introduced and came onto a stage and then sang a few lines of a meaningful (woke) song they'd learnt. As you got to the older groups the hand and body movements became more in time with the song and each other.
I have to say I found it moving. They were all so nice and kind to each other and when they took us round their classrooms they were relaxed and confident and eager to show us what they'd done
But I couldn't help this gnawing question of how these beautiful bright young children without a prejudice in the world could have turned into those flag waving morons that turned out in London two Saturdays ago.
I'm not in sympathy with the themes of the march, but it's possible to be mild 90% of the time and still nurse passionate prejudices and resentment. If we write them all off as flag-waving morons we miss the point. A lot of people are emotional about politics on the rare occasions when they pay attention to it at all. The challenge is to engage that emotion positively without expecting them suddenly to subscribe to the Guardian.
We are a people who've been told we have no culture. To me the march looked like people who are seeking their roots, and remembering (in the visibility of Islam) that those roots are Christian.
Our cultural roots are strongly intertwined with Christianity, but there are a lot of other sources too.
Indeed, and we can be proud of having led the way towards rejection of such superstitious nonsense, firstly by inventing our own Christianity-lite where adherents only have to pretend, and then by abandoning even that.
That's where the aphorism about "you don't believe in nothing, you believe in anything" has at least a kernel of truth.
Organised religions have a lot wrong with them. Most of their adherents come nowhere near living up to their ideals. We know this.
However, weak tea 'wouldn't it be good if everyone tried being nicer to each other' has definite advantages over what tends to fill its space. It's very hard, for example, to reconcile the actions of the current manifestation of Christian Nationalism with the recorded attitudes of Christ.
TL/DR; the Truss/Kwarteng plan to sell more gilts ran smack into the Bank's plan to sell more gilts and no-one noticed, or no-one was forewarned.
Yes, the Bank and fiscal policy (including energy bailout) together were the issue.
The mini budget was rather minor in isolation. The issue was the 3 combined all pushed in the same direction.
It's not even that. It's that Truss misunderstood the purpose of the OBR.
The purpose of the OBR is to provide reassurance to the markets that Britain will be able to repay its debts in the future, and thereby create the market confidence that allows Britain to continue merrily borrowing more money now.
By sidelining the OBR she shattered market confidence. The result was inevitable.
Not true, the OBR had only existed for a few years and the UK dealt with the market without it.
The issue was that there was a minibudget increasing gilt sales and the OBR was sidelined and there was a limitless energy bailout increasing gilt sales and the Bank of England switching from Quantitative Easing to Quantitive Tightening for the first time ever increasing gilt sales.
Any one by itself might be fine, all of those happening together within 24 hours of each other . . . the result was inevitable.
We still don’t know what Johnson was up to - when actually serving as British PM - giving his security the slip and going off to meet that Russian oligarch in his Italian villa. I’d imagine MI6 know, and it will all come out one day.
The theory that Boris was in bed with the Russians is a strange one. Among the core powers, he was initially a remarkably lone voice in powerfully fighting Ukraine’s corner. I have directly heard it this month that when the war eventually ends, British contractors will be welcomed with open arms in Ukraine, and that Brits “will never understand just how many lives they saved” in 2022.
Having bring in Ukraine last month, that is very much correct.
Whatever one might have to say about Boris Johnson, Ukrainians absolutely love him. He was the face of the initial Western response to the war as far as they are concerned. And yes, there will be a lot of work in clearing up and rebuilding much of the country after the war, will be a huge opportunity for British companies.
And Boris's support of Ukraine (alongside his push for Covid vaccines) was his finest hour.
It's a terrible shame that he was also lazy and casually dishonest.
Isn't it in the nature of Reform supporters to ignore what they don't want to know about? 'It's all a onspiracy and if he is a crook, he is at least our kind of crook.'
In this respect at least the Party truly represents the British wing of the MAGA movement.
Its interesting reading the the comments beneath the occasional Centrist-Dad article that appears in Unherd (which has, intended or not, become a kind of Reform/MAGA inhouse journal). The commentators get really, really upset that the editor has allowed such stuff to invade their safe space and threaten to cancel their subscriptions etc. Such attitudes are not new (we had PB posters who'd shield themselves from other posters with a browser widget) but it does feel that it's now the modus operandi of an entire political movement.
Given Unherd was founded by Paul Marshall and Tim Montgomerie (& still funded by the former I think), I believe the end destination, an ‘only asking questions’, approved free speech silo, was pretty intentional.
Off topic: I'm not averse to a good moan on here about the state of the education system, so thought I should balance that out with a bit of praise.
My school had an INSET day yesterday. In times gone by these days would be crammed full of sessions focused on the senior leadership team members' pet projects or fads, which immediately get forgotten because noone has time to implement them.
Yesterday, aside from an hour where we discussed how to respond to the London riots (we have a very diverse student body) we were trusted to use the day to deal with all the backlog of tasks that always arise in September as a result of the new school year.
This was a really conscious choice on the school's part to reduce burnout amongst staff. It is something the headteacher has agency over, and is exactly the sort of thing that will stop our school, and the system as a whole, bleeding staff. I managed to pin down my line manager to meet, meaning that I am now enthusiastic about how I can move my role forward over the next few months.
More importantly, I sorted out an assessment for students that will mean we can make sure they're in the right class to prepare for their GCSEs, and give them and home a month's warning of the assessment, rather than springing it on them. The school's decision to reduce the crap they throw our way will have a tangible positive impact on our students' experience of preparing for their maths GCSE.
I'm impressed.
I went to a junior school yesterday which was a show put on for parents/grandparents. The kids were from 4-10 I think. Each group of about 40 or 50 were introduced and came onto a stage and then sang a few lines of a meaningful (woke) song they'd learnt. As you got to the older groups the hand and body movements became more in time with the song and each other.
I have to say I found it moving. They were all so nice and kind to each other and when they took us round their classrooms they were relaxed and confident and eager to show us what they'd done
But I couldn't help this gnawing question of how these beautiful bright young children without a prejudice in the world could have turned into those flag waving morons that turned out in London two Saturdays ago.
I'm not in sympathy with the themes of the march, but it's possible to be mild 90% of the time and still nurse passionate prejudices and resentment. If we write them all off as flag-waving morons we miss the point. A lot of people are emotional about politics on the rare occasions when they pay attention to it at all. The challenge is to engage that emotion positively without expecting them suddenly to subscribe to the Guardian.
We are a people who've been told we have no culture. To me the march looked like people who are seeking their roots, and remembering (in the visibility of Islam) that those roots are Christian.
Our cultural roots are strongly intertwined with Christianity, but there are a lot of other sources too.
Indeed, and we can be proud of having led the way towards rejection of such superstitious nonsense, firstly by inventing our own Christianity-lite where adherents only have to pretend, and then by abandoning even that.
That's where the aphorism about "you don't believe in nothing, you believe in anything" has at least a kernel of truth.
Organised religions have a lot wrong with them. Most of their adherents come nowhere near living up to their ideals. We know this.
However, weak tea 'wouldn't it be good if everyone tried being nicer to each other' has definite advantages over what tends to fill its space. It's very hard, for example, to reconcile the actions of the current manifestation of Christian Nationalism with the recorded attitudes of Christ.
Just "most"?
I'd say yes.
There are a smallish number of people who actually are holier than thou. The curious thing being that they don't bang on about it, because they don't want to. Discomforting to be around, but in a good way.
How long is it since people started to use inflatables to cross the Channel? Prior to their introduction the number of 'small boats across the Channel' was infinitesimal.
When I frequented a yacht club from which people frequently made Channel crossings smuggling was an issue but never people. The Middle East was a lot more peaceful then, of course.
From 2018 after they had closed the smuggling by trucks
2018 - 539
2019 - 1,843
2020 - 8,461
2021 - 28,526
2022 - 45,755
2023 - 29,437
2024 - 37,000
2025 - 30,000 to date
The really big upticks correspond with Starmer becoming LOTO. Surely that can't be a coincidence.
Off topic: I'm not averse to a good moan on here about the state of the education system, so thought I should balance that out with a bit of praise.
My school had an INSET day yesterday. In times gone by these days would be crammed full of sessions focused on the senior leadership team members' pet projects or fads, which immediately get forgotten because noone has time to implement them.
Yesterday, aside from an hour where we discussed how to respond to the London riots (we have a very diverse student body) we were trusted to use the day to deal with all the backlog of tasks that always arise in September as a result of the new school year.
This was a really conscious choice on the school's part to reduce burnout amongst staff. It is something the headteacher has agency over, and is exactly the sort of thing that will stop our school, and the system as a whole, bleeding staff. I managed to pin down my line manager to meet, meaning that I am now enthusiastic about how I can move my role forward over the next few months.
More importantly, I sorted out an assessment for students that will mean we can make sure they're in the right class to prepare for their GCSEs, and give them and home a month's warning of the assessment, rather than springing it on them. The school's decision to reduce the crap they throw our way will have a tangible positive impact on our students' experience of preparing for their maths GCSE.
I'm impressed.
I went to a junior school yesterday which was a show put on for parents/grandparents. The kids were from 4-10 I think. Each group of about 40 or 50 were introduced and came onto a stage and then sang a few lines of a meaningful (woke) song they'd learnt. As you got to the older groups the hand and body movements became more in time with the song and each other.
I have to say I found it moving. They were all so nice and kind to each other and when they took us round their classrooms they were relaxed and confident and eager to show us what they'd done
But I couldn't help this gnawing question of how these beautiful bright young children without a prejudice in the world could have turned into those flag waving morons that turned out in London two Saturdays ago.
I'm not in sympathy with the themes of the march, but it's possible to be mild 90% of the time and still nurse passionate prejudices and resentment. If we write them all off as flag-waving morons we miss the point. A lot of people are emotional about politics on the rare occasions when they pay attention to it at all. The challenge is to engage that emotion positively without expecting them suddenly to subscribe to the Guardian.
We are a people who've been told we have no culture. To me the march looked like people who are seeking their roots, and remembering (in the visibility of Islam) that those roots are Christian.
Our cultural roots are strongly intertwined with Christianity, but there are a lot of other sources too.
Indeed, and we can be proud of having led the way towards rejection of such superstitious nonsense, firstly by inventing our own Christianity-lite where adherents only have to pretend, and then by abandoning even that.
That's where the aphorism about "you don't believe in nothing, you believe in anything" has at least a kernel of truth.
Organised religions have a lot wrong with them. Most of their adherents come nowhere near living up to their ideals. We know this.
However, weak tea 'wouldn't it be good if everyone tried being nicer to each other' has definite advantages over what tends to fill its space. It's very hard, for example, to reconcile the actions of the current manifestation of Christian Nationalism with the recorded attitudes of Christ.
Just "most"?
I'd say yes.
There are a smallish number of people who actually are holier than thou. The curious thing being that they don't bang on about it, because they don't want to. Discomforting to be around, but in a good way.
I'm not familiar with many people who are holier than thou that keep to the tenet of "judge not, lest ye be judged".
As someone living in a country with ID cards, let’s just say that the big database is entirely the point, and that something intended for very limited use quickly becomes ubiquitous for every interaction with the both the State, and any number of private companies.
Yes, if I lived in the UK I’d be signing the petition opposing them.
I posted this last night.
Good thread on ID cards. Why don't we have legislators/civil servants who can understand and explain this, and legislate accordingly ?
1/ I don’t instinctively like the idea of ID cards. It offends my liberal sensibilities. But Digital IDs aren’t the privacy catastrophe they would have been in the 2000s... https://x.com/LawrenceLundy/status/1971543613868998952
7/ “Done right” is doing a lot of heavy lifting yes. Of course, the devil is in design. A “canonical event log” of every check could easily tip into surveillance. Guardrails are needed around logs, retention, transparency reports.
8/ Citizens need three guarantees: – Share less, prove more. – No new central database. – Errors are visible and appealable...
That means NOT giving the contract to Palantir, of course.
I don't have much confidence that we'll follow those principles.
Agreed, but if those guarantees were in place I would accept ID cards. That's why I won't sign the petition - it's too blanket anti.
I suspect that the government is trying to do too many things at once with this (dead cat, performative action on the boats, backroom deals with Palantir to try to curry favour on AI) and that's why they won't put these guarantees in place.
If ID cards really were about the right to work, it would be easy to put guardrails in place to stop them being just another way that our data gets forcibly transferred into the hands of billionaires.
They don't want to put the guardrails in place because they want to access all the data and share it and be able to transfer it to whoever the hell they like and they like the idea that they will be able to control the population more easily.
The argument about ID cards is an argument between (a) those who believe governments and bureaucracies are essentially benevolent, get things wrong by mistake and will try to correct their mistakes and (b) those who look at the reality and believe that governments and bureaucracies are much more capable of malice and much less benevolent than we like to believe and do not much care about making mistakes or the harm they will cause because they calculate, rightly, that they can get away with this.
There is lots of evidence for the latter and, frankly, not much evidence for the former. Digital ID should be voluntary so that the trusting and naive (group a) can take their chances. If they work without the downsides that others fear they will be adopted soon enough.
The argument about ID cards is a near total distraction from the real one we should be having over the principles which constrain (or fail to) government's use of personal data.
All the bad stuff will happen, irrespective of ID cards, if that argument is abandoned. Which it largely will be if and when the ID card scheme is blocked.
Yes, exactly - ID cards are a totem but the reality is the government has all our personal data anyway, and I suspect access to real-time tracking via our smartphones.
You want privacy? Leave your phone at home, and walk out with a wallet and cash.
Yes, I used to be bothered by ID cards, but really dont care much either way now.
Between smartphones (which are now effectively compulsory at work, as much is done via apps) and the ubiquity of CCTV in the UK we long since abolished privacy. Previously it wasn't practicable to follow everyone because of the vast sea of data, but now with AI and facial recognition it is already possible to track anyone and everyone.
We live in the presence of an omniscient state.
Interesting you say smartphones are compulsory for work. I have one only because it used to be essential for work, but now technology has moved on to the point where I don't need it again. In my current project all calls now are via Teams or Slack, my own phone number isn't published and I haven't made a single work-related call on it. My only use was to text a colleague (the only one who had my number) when I was running late on my way in to a training session.
So I'm thinking I might give it up again, annoyingly I now need it for home use because I gave up the land line at my last braodband contract renewal. Perhaps I'll get a brick, and leave it at home.
On the subject of Russia I see they’re now busy manufacturing a crisis at Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant to extort something or other. One more confirmation Putin’s mob are an organised crime syndicate posing as a national government.
That’s exceedingly unkind.
The Mafia have never blown up a nuclear power plant in Ukraine.
As someone living in a country with ID cards, let’s just say that the big database is entirely the point, and that something intended for very limited use quickly becomes ubiquitous for every interaction with the both the State, and any number of private companies.
Yes, if I lived in the UK I’d be signing the petition opposing them.
I posted this last night.
Good thread on ID cards. Why don't we have legislators/civil servants who can understand and explain this, and legislate accordingly ?
1/ I don’t instinctively like the idea of ID cards. It offends my liberal sensibilities. But Digital IDs aren’t the privacy catastrophe they would have been in the 2000s... https://x.com/LawrenceLundy/status/1971543613868998952
7/ “Done right” is doing a lot of heavy lifting yes. Of course, the devil is in design. A “canonical event log” of every check could easily tip into surveillance. Guardrails are needed around logs, retention, transparency reports.
8/ Citizens need three guarantees: – Share less, prove more. – No new central database. – Errors are visible and appealable...
That means NOT giving the contract to Palantir, of course.
I don't have much confidence that we'll follow those principles.
Agreed, but if those guarantees were in place I would accept ID cards. That's why I won't sign the petition - it's too blanket anti.
I suspect that the government is trying to do too many things at once with this (dead cat, performative action on the boats, backroom deals with Palantir to try to curry favour on AI) and that's why they won't put these guarantees in place.
If ID cards really were about the right to work, it would be easy to put guardrails in place to stop them being just another way that our data gets forcibly transferred into the hands of billionaires.
They don't want to put the guardrails in place because they want to access all the data and share it and be able to transfer it to whoever the hell they like and they like the idea that they will be able to control the population more easily.
The argument about ID cards is an argument between (a) those who believe governments and bureaucracies are essentially benevolent, get things wrong by mistake and will try to correct their mistakes and (b) those who look at the reality and believe that governments and bureaucracies are much more capable of malice and much less benevolent than we like to believe and do not much care about making mistakes or the harm they will cause because they calculate, rightly, that they can get away with this.
There is lots of evidence for the latter and, frankly, not much evidence for the former. Digital ID should be voluntary so that the trusting and naive (group a) can take their chances. If they work without the downsides that others fear they will be adopted soon enough.
The argument about ID cards is a near total distraction from the real one we should be having over the principles which constrain (or fail to) government's use of personal data.
All the bad stuff will happen, irrespective of ID cards, if that argument is abandoned. Which it largely will be if and when the ID card scheme is blocked.
Yes, exactly - ID cards are a totem but the reality is the government has all our personal data anyway, and I suspect access to real-time tracking via our smartphones.
You want privacy? Leave your phone at home, and walk out with a wallet and cash.
Yes, I used to be bothered by ID cards, but really dont care much either way now.
Between smartphones (which are now effectively compulsory at work, as much is done via apps) and the ubiquity of CCTV in the UK we long since abolished privacy. Previously it wasn't practicable to follow everyone because of the vast sea of data, but now with AI and facial recognition it is already possible to track anyone and everyone.
We live in the presence of an omniscient state.
Interesting you say smartphones are compulsory for work. I have one only because it used to be essential for work, but now technology has moved on to the point where I don't need it again. In my current project all calls now are via Teams or Slack, my own phone number isn't published and I haven't made a single work-related call on it. My only use was to text a colleague (the only one who had my number) when I was running late on my way in to a training session.
So I'm thinking I might give it up again, annoyingly I now need it for home use because I gave up the land line at my last broadband contract renewal. Perhaps I'll get a brick, and leave it at home.
My personal phone is essential for work only because of two-factor authorisation, where a code is sent to my phone to allow me to log in to secure work applications.
As someone living in a country with ID cards, let’s just say that the big database is entirely the point, and that something intended for very limited use quickly becomes ubiquitous for every interaction with the both the State, and any number of private companies.
Yes, if I lived in the UK I’d be signing the petition opposing them.
I posted this last night.
Good thread on ID cards. Why don't we have legislators/civil servants who can understand and explain this, and legislate accordingly ?
1/ I don’t instinctively like the idea of ID cards. It offends my liberal sensibilities. But Digital IDs aren’t the privacy catastrophe they would have been in the 2000s... https://x.com/LawrenceLundy/status/1971543613868998952
7/ “Done right” is doing a lot of heavy lifting yes. Of course, the devil is in design. A “canonical event log” of every check could easily tip into surveillance. Guardrails are needed around logs, retention, transparency reports.
8/ Citizens need three guarantees: – Share less, prove more. – No new central database. – Errors are visible and appealable...
That means NOT giving the contract to Palantir, of course.
I don't have much confidence that we'll follow those principles.
Agreed, but if those guarantees were in place I would accept ID cards. That's why I won't sign the petition - it's too blanket anti.
I suspect that the government is trying to do too many things at once with this (dead cat, performative action on the boats, backroom deals with Palantir to try to curry favour on AI) and that's why they won't put these guarantees in place.
If ID cards really were about the right to work, it would be easy to put guardrails in place to stop them being just another way that our data gets forcibly transferred into the hands of billionaires.
They don't want to put the guardrails in place because they want to access all the data and share it and be able to transfer it to whoever the hell they like and they like the idea that they will be able to control the population more easily.
The argument about ID cards is an argument between (a) those who believe governments and bureaucracies are essentially benevolent, get things wrong by mistake and will try to correct their mistakes and (b) those who look at the reality and believe that governments and bureaucracies are much more capable of malice and much less benevolent than we like to believe and do not much care about making mistakes or the harm they will cause because they calculate, rightly, that they can get away with this.
There is lots of evidence for the latter and, frankly, not much evidence for the former. Digital ID should be voluntary so that the trusting and naive (group a) can take their chances. If they work without the downsides that others fear they will be adopted soon enough.
The argument about ID cards is a near total distraction from the real one we should be having over the principles which constrain (or fail to) government's use of personal data.
All the bad stuff will happen, irrespective of ID cards, if that argument is abandoned. Which it largely will be if and when the ID card scheme is blocked.
Yes, exactly - ID cards are a totem but the reality is the government has all our personal data anyway, and I suspect access to real-time tracking via our smartphones.
You want privacy? Leave your phone at home, and walk out with a wallet and cash.
Yes, I used to be bothered by ID cards, but really dont care much either way now.
Between smartphones (which are now effectively compulsory at work, as much is done via apps) and the ubiquity of CCTV in the UK we long since abolished privacy. Previously it wasn't practicable to follow everyone because of the vast sea of data, but now with AI and facial recognition it is already possible to track anyone and everyone.
We live in the presence of an omniscient state.
Interesting you say smartphones are compulsory for work. I have one only because it used to be essential for work, but now technology has moved on to the point where I don't need it again. In my current project all calls now are via Teams or Slack, my own phone number isn't published and I haven't made a single work-related call on it. My only use was to text a colleague (the only one who had my number) when I was running late on my way in to a training session.
So I'm thinking I might give it up again, annoyingly I now need it for home use because I gave up the land line at my last braodband contract renewal. Perhaps I'll get a brick, and leave it at home.
For work I have a tablet that deals with all my electronic needs. It has a cover with a keyboard to effectively act as a Laptop, it can plug into my desk to link to equipment there to effectively act a PC, and I can use it anywhere I am and take all my files and communications with me. Any communications happen via apps on that device.
As you say, I don't have any calls using an actual phone number anymore, that's quite ancient and outdated technology.
I like my phone for my personal use, but I never really need it for work - except for a few seconds in limited instances where I use it as 2 factor authentication.
As someone living in a country with ID cards, let’s just say that the big database is entirely the point, and that something intended for very limited use quickly becomes ubiquitous for every interaction with the both the State, and any number of private companies.
Yes, if I lived in the UK I’d be signing the petition opposing them.
I posted this last night.
Good thread on ID cards. Why don't we have legislators/civil servants who can understand and explain this, and legislate accordingly ?
1/ I don’t instinctively like the idea of ID cards. It offends my liberal sensibilities. But Digital IDs aren’t the privacy catastrophe they would have been in the 2000s... https://x.com/LawrenceLundy/status/1971543613868998952
7/ “Done right” is doing a lot of heavy lifting yes. Of course, the devil is in design. A “canonical event log” of every check could easily tip into surveillance. Guardrails are needed around logs, retention, transparency reports.
8/ Citizens need three guarantees: – Share less, prove more. – No new central database. – Errors are visible and appealable...
That means NOT giving the contract to Palantir, of course.
I don't have much confidence that we'll follow those principles.
Agreed, but if those guarantees were in place I would accept ID cards. That's why I won't sign the petition - it's too blanket anti.
I suspect that the government is trying to do too many things at once with this (dead cat, performative action on the boats, backroom deals with Palantir to try to curry favour on AI) and that's why they won't put these guarantees in place.
If ID cards really were about the right to work, it would be easy to put guardrails in place to stop them being just another way that our data gets forcibly transferred into the hands of billionaires.
They don't want to put the guardrails in place because they want to access all the data and share it and be able to transfer it to whoever the hell they like and they like the idea that they will be able to control the population more easily.
The argument about ID cards is an argument between (a) those who believe governments and bureaucracies are essentially benevolent, get things wrong by mistake and will try to correct their mistakes and (b) those who look at the reality and believe that governments and bureaucracies are much more capable of malice and much less benevolent than we like to believe and do not much care about making mistakes or the harm they will cause because they calculate, rightly, that they can get away with this.
There is lots of evidence for the latter and, frankly, not much evidence for the former. Digital ID should be voluntary so that the trusting and naive (group a) can take their chances. If they work without the downsides that others fear they will be adopted soon enough.
The argument about ID cards is a near total distraction from the real one we should be having over the principles which constrain (or fail to) government's use of personal data.
All the bad stuff will happen, irrespective of ID cards, if that argument is abandoned. Which it largely will be if and when the ID card scheme is blocked.
Yes, exactly - ID cards are a totem but the reality is the government has all our personal data anyway, and I suspect access to real-time tracking via our smartphones.
You want privacy? Leave your phone at home, and walk out with a wallet and cash.
Yes, I used to be bothered by ID cards, but really dont care much either way now.
Between smartphones (which are now effectively compulsory at work, as much is done via apps) and the ubiquity of CCTV in the UK we long since abolished privacy. Previously it wasn't practicable to follow everyone because of the vast sea of data, but now with AI and facial recognition it is already possible to track anyone and everyone.
We live in the presence of an omniscient state.
Interesting you say smartphones are compulsory for work. I have one only because it used to be essential for work, but now technology has moved on to the point where I don't need it again. In my current project all calls now are via Teams or Slack, my own phone number isn't published and I haven't made a single work-related call on it. My only use was to text a colleague (the only one who had my number) when I was running late on my way in to a training session.
So I'm thinking I might give it up again, annoyingly I now need it for home use because I gave up the land line at my last broadband contract renewal. Perhaps I'll get a brick, and leave it at home.
My personal phone is essential for work only because of two-factor authorisation, where a code is sent to my phone to allow me to log in to secure work applications.
Mine too. I am sure that an offer from Crown Office to cover the cost of it is in the post and has been for the last 3 years.
Off topic: I'm not averse to a good moan on here about the state of the education system, so thought I should balance that out with a bit of praise.
My school had an INSET day yesterday. In times gone by these days would be crammed full of sessions focused on the senior leadership team members' pet projects or fads, which immediately get forgotten because noone has time to implement them.
Yesterday, aside from an hour where we discussed how to respond to the London riots (we have a very diverse student body) we were trusted to use the day to deal with all the backlog of tasks that always arise in September as a result of the new school year.
This was a really conscious choice on the school's part to reduce burnout amongst staff. It is something the headteacher has agency over, and is exactly the sort of thing that will stop our school, and the system as a whole, bleeding staff. I managed to pin down my line manager to meet, meaning that I am now enthusiastic about how I can move my role forward over the next few months.
More importantly, I sorted out an assessment for students that will mean we can make sure they're in the right class to prepare for their GCSEs, and give them and home a month's warning of the assessment, rather than springing it on them. The school's decision to reduce the crap they throw our way will have a tangible positive impact on our students' experience of preparing for their maths GCSE.
I'm impressed.
I went to a junior school yesterday which was a show put on for parents/grandparents. The kids were from 4-10 I think. Each group of about 40 or 50 were introduced and came onto a stage and then sang a few lines of a meaningful (woke) song they'd learnt. As you got to the older groups the hand and body movements became more in time with the song and each other.
I have to say I found it moving. They were all so nice and kind to each other and when they took us round their classrooms they were relaxed and confident and eager to show us what they'd done
But I couldn't help this gnawing question of how these beautiful bright young children without a prejudice in the world could have turned into those flag waving morons that turned out in London two Saturdays ago.
I'm not in sympathy with the themes of the march, but it's possible to be mild 90% of the time and still nurse passionate prejudices and resentment. If we write them all off as flag-waving morons we miss the point. A lot of people are emotional about politics on the rare occasions when they pay attention to it at all. The challenge is to engage that emotion positively without expecting them suddenly to subscribe to the Guardian.
We are a people who've been told we have no culture. To me the march looked like people who are seeking their roots, and remembering (in the visibility of Islam) that those roots are Christian.
Our cultural roots are strongly intertwined with Christianity, but there are a lot of other sources too.
Indeed, and we can be proud of having led the way towards rejection of such superstitious nonsense, firstly by inventing our own Christianity-lite where adherents only have to pretend, and then by abandoning even that.
That's where the aphorism about "you don't believe in nothing, you believe in anything" has at least a kernel of truth.
Organised religions have a lot wrong with them. Most of their adherents come nowhere near living up to their ideals. We know this.
However, weak tea 'wouldn't it be good if everyone tried being nicer to each other' has definite advantages over what tends to fill its space. It's very hard, for example, to reconcile the actions of the current manifestation of Christian Nationalism with the recorded attitudes of Christ.
Just "most"?
I'd say yes.
There are a smallish number of people who actually are holier than thou. The curious thing being that they don't bang on about it, because they don't want to. Discomforting to be around, but in a good way.
I'm not familiar with many people who are holier than thou that keep to the tenet of "judge not, lest ye be judged".
Like I say, it's a smallish number. I can think of three or four unambiguously great souls I have met in my lifetime, and a lot more trying their best. And the different circles we move in definitely make a difference.
Holiness is a bit like 'suitability to run a government'; the more you say you have it, the more that you show that you haven't begun to understand the concept.
Talking of which, we may have a new Archbishop of Canterbury this week. Now there's a job where wanting the role ought to disqualify you.
A Labour politician abused his mayoral office to try to secure immigration visas to bring 41 family members and friends from Bangladesh to Britain, a Telegraph investigation has found.
Cllr Mohammad Amirul Islam sent both “official” and “doctored” letters emblazoned with his council’s crest and logo to the British High Commission in Dhaka in an attempt to get visa applications treated “favourably”.
Proof that the councillor loves Britain and hates Bangladesh. Give him a peerage.
That is the paradox of the whole immigration debate, from both left and right who argue Britain is a terrible place and declining further. People want to come here because Britain is better than wherever they are.
That amuses me too. My mother in law spends all her time moaning about what an awful country this is, until I ask her when she plans to return home!
TL/DR; the Truss/Kwarteng plan to sell more gilts ran smack into the Bank's plan to sell more gilts and no-one noticed, or no-one was forewarned.
Yes, the Bank and fiscal policy (including energy bailout) together were the issue.
The mini budget was rather minor in isolation. The issue was the 3 combined all pushed in the same direction.
It's not even that. It's that Truss misunderstood the purpose of the OBR.
The purpose of the OBR is to provide reassurance to the markets that Britain will be able to repay its debts in the future, and thereby create the market confidence that allows Britain to continue merrily borrowing more money now.
By sidelining the OBR she shattered market confidence. The result was inevitable.
Not true, the OBR had only existed for a few years and the UK dealt with the market without it.
The issue was that there was a minibudget increasing gilt sales and the OBR was sidelined and there was a limitless energy bailout increasing gilt sales and the Bank of England switching from Quantitative Easing to Quantitive Tightening for the first time ever increasing gilt sales.
Any one by itself might be fine, all of those happening together within 24 hours of each other . . . the result was inevitable.
and the day after they said by the way we going to cut a bunch more taxes next year.
We still don’t know what Johnson was up to - when actually serving as British PM - giving his security the slip and going off to meet that Russian oligarch in his Italian villa. I’d imagine MI6 know, and it will all come out one day.
The theory that Boris was in bed with the Russians is a strange one. Among the core powers, he was initially a remarkably lone voice in powerfully fighting Ukraine’s corner. I have directly heard it this month that when the war eventually ends, British contractors will be welcomed with open arms in Ukraine, and that Brits “will never understand just how many lives they saved” in 2022.
Having bring in Ukraine last month, that is very much correct.
Whatever one might have to say about Boris Johnson, Ukrainians absolutely love him. He was the face of the initial Western response to the war as far as they are concerned. And yes, there will be a lot of work in clearing up and rebuilding much of the country after the war, will be a huge opportunity for British companies.
And Boris's support of Ukraine (alongside his push for Covid vaccines) was his finest hour.
It's a terrible shame that he was also lazy and casually dishonest.
That he was lazy and casually dishonest was already known.
That neither Boris not the Conservative party generally put in any safeguards against that laziness and casual dishonesty was disastrously reckless of them.
It's short but worth watching. (Don't miss the first clip)
Israel has brought this on itself. It is a consequence of the disgust at their appalling behaviour in Gaza and our impotence to do anything about it. What effect it will have on the ground, I am really not sure.
As someone living in a country with ID cards, let’s just say that the big database is entirely the point, and that something intended for very limited use quickly becomes ubiquitous for every interaction with the both the State, and any number of private companies.
Yes, if I lived in the UK I’d be signing the petition opposing them.
I posted this last night.
Good thread on ID cards. Why don't we have legislators/civil servants who can understand and explain this, and legislate accordingly ?
1/ I don’t instinctively like the idea of ID cards. It offends my liberal sensibilities. But Digital IDs aren’t the privacy catastrophe they would have been in the 2000s... https://x.com/LawrenceLundy/status/1971543613868998952
7/ “Done right” is doing a lot of heavy lifting yes. Of course, the devil is in design. A “canonical event log” of every check could easily tip into surveillance. Guardrails are needed around logs, retention, transparency reports.
8/ Citizens need three guarantees: – Share less, prove more. – No new central database. – Errors are visible and appealable...
That means NOT giving the contract to Palantir, of course.
I don't have much confidence that we'll follow those principles.
Agreed, but if those guarantees were in place I would accept ID cards. That's why I won't sign the petition - it's too blanket anti.
I suspect that the government is trying to do too many things at once with this (dead cat, performative action on the boats, backroom deals with Palantir to try to curry favour on AI) and that's why they won't put these guarantees in place.
If ID cards really were about the right to work, it would be easy to put guardrails in place to stop them being just another way that our data gets forcibly transferred into the hands of billionaires.
They don't want to put the guardrails in place because they want to access all the data and share it and be able to transfer it to whoever the hell they like and they like the idea that they will be able to control the population more easily.
The argument about ID cards is an argument between (a) those who believe governments and bureaucracies are essentially benevolent, get things wrong by mistake and will try to correct their mistakes and (b) those who look at the reality and believe that governments and bureaucracies are much more capable of malice and much less benevolent than we like to believe and do not much care about making mistakes or the harm they will cause because they calculate, rightly, that they can get away with this.
There is lots of evidence for the latter and, frankly, not much evidence for the former. Digital ID should be voluntary so that the trusting and naive (group a) can take their chances. If they work without the downsides that others fear they will be adopted soon enough.
The argument about ID cards is a near total distraction from the real one we should be having over the principles which constrain (or fail to) government's use of personal data.
All the bad stuff will happen, irrespective of ID cards, if that argument is abandoned. Which it largely will be if and when the ID card scheme is blocked.
Yes, exactly - ID cards are a totem but the reality is the government has all our personal data anyway, and I suspect access to real-time tracking via our smartphones.
You want privacy? Leave your phone at home, and walk out with a wallet and cash.
Yes, I used to be bothered by ID cards, but really dont care much either way now.
Between smartphones (which are now effectively compulsory at work, as much is done via apps) and the ubiquity of CCTV in the UK we long since abolished privacy. Previously it wasn't practicable to follow everyone because of the vast sea of data, but now with AI and facial recognition it is already possible to track anyone and everyone.
We live in the presence of an omniscient state.
Interesting you say smartphones are compulsory for work. I have one only because it used to be essential for work, but now technology has moved on to the point where I don't need it again. In my current project all calls now are via Teams or Slack, my own phone number isn't published and I haven't made a single work-related call on it. My only use was to text a colleague (the only one who had my number) when I was running late on my way in to a training session.
So I'm thinking I might give it up again, annoyingly I now need it for home use because I gave up the land line at my last braodband contract renewal. Perhaps I'll get a brick, and leave it at home.
For work I have a tablet that deals with all my electronic needs. It has a cover with a keyboard to effectively act as a Laptop, it can plug into my desk to link to equipment there to effectively act a PC, and I can use it anywhere I am and take all my files and communications with me. Any communications happen via apps on that device.
As you say, I don't have any calls using an actual phone number anymore, that's quite ancient and outdated technology.
I like my phone for my personal use, but I never really need it for work - except for a few seconds in limited instances where I use it as 2 factor authentication.
Hmm... I think there is one site that I would need it for 2FA about once every 3 months now you mention it.
But thinking about it the one thing I would actually want to retain is Strava.
We still don’t know what Johnson was up to - when actually serving as British PM - giving his security the slip and going off to meet that Russian oligarch in his Italian villa. I’d imagine MI6 know, and it will all come out one day.
The theory that Boris was in bed with the Russians is a strange one. Among the core powers, he was initially a remarkably lone voice in powerfully fighting Ukraine’s corner. I have directly heard it this month that when the war eventually ends, British contractors will be welcomed with open arms in Ukraine, and that Brits “will never understand just how many lives they saved” in 2022.
Having bring in Ukraine last month, that is very much correct.
Whatever one might have to say about Boris Johnson, Ukrainians absolutely love him. He was the face of the initial Western response to the war as far as they are concerned. And yes, there will be a lot of work in clearing up and rebuilding much of the country after the war, will be a huge opportunity for British companies.
And Boris's support of Ukraine (alongside his push for Covid vaccines) was his finest hour.
It's a terrible shame that he was also lazy and casually dishonest.
Petition now up to 1.2 million, still running at more than 1,000 signups per minute
Now 1.3 million.
While the extent of public concern isn’t a surprise, that people are signing up at such a rate today indicates it’s being pushed in a professional and very effective way - I wonder how and where?
Does anyone agree with this? I think the signing of the petition is just ordinary people taking part, nothing professional about it.
Yes, I am getting targeted ads to sign this petition, it's not organic.
Russia has been trying to cultivate politicians worldwide for years, and in the UK it has been remarkably even-handed with who it approached. In the Conservatives you had the likes of Boris and Osborne; Labour Mandelson, Goldsmith and Brown; the SNP Salmond, and UKIP/Reform has Farage himself and others, as shown in the Gill court case. The Lib Dems had Mike Hancock.
This does not mean any of the above did anything wrong; just that Russia was really trying to cultivate influence. Some of the interactions may have appeared totally benign to the targets. Whether they succeeded in the case of the individuals mentioned is questionable; though in the case of Gill, they definitely did.
Was there not also a Lib Dem fifty-something sex god?
I think Lembit has now joined Reform.
If I were Reform, I wouldn't touch him with a barge poll. In 2010, a year when the LibDems increased their national vote share, he managed to lose a seat* which had been held by the party (and it's predecessors) for all but four years of the previous century and a half.
* A seat, I would note, where the LibDems had previously outpolled the Conservatives 2:1.
I remember him saying he "didn't see it coming". Unusual for a LibDem as they usually have a background in community activism. Lembit's activism evidently took a different form, however.
Not surprised to hear he has joined Reform. The natural home for self-regarding egotists who are not held in high regard by anyone else.
Russia has been trying to cultivate politicians worldwide for years, and in the UK it has been remarkably even-handed with who it approached. In the Conservatives you had the likes of Boris and Osborne; Labour Mandelson, Goldsmith and Brown; the SNP Salmond, and UKIP/Reform has Farage himself and others, as shown in the Gill court case. The Lib Dems had Mike Hancock.
This does not mean any of the above did anything wrong; just that Russia was really trying to cultivate influence. Some of the interactions may have appeared totally benign to the targets. Whether they succeeded in the case of the individuals mentioned is questionable; though in the case of Gill, they definitely did.
Was there not also a Lib Dem fifty-something sex god?
I think Lembit has now joined Reform.
I was not sure if he had, but if so that is one more for the the list of "MPs and ex-MPs".
I mean of course the one who allegedly seduced an alleged Russian spy, without being cheeky (Cough) .
In August 2025, Opik joined Reform at the 2025 Reform UK conference.
Russia has been trying to cultivate politicians worldwide for years, and in the UK it has been remarkably even-handed with who it approached. In the Conservatives you had the likes of Boris and Osborne; Labour Mandelson, Goldsmith and Brown; the SNP Salmond, and UKIP/Reform has Farage himself and others, as shown in the Gill court case. The Lib Dems had Mike Hancock.
This does not mean any of the above did anything wrong; just that Russia was really trying to cultivate influence. Some of the interactions may have appeared totally benign to the targets. Whether they succeeded in the case of the individuals mentioned is questionable; though in the case of Gill, they definitely did.
Was there not also a Lib Dem fifty-something sex god?
I think Lembit has now joined Reform.
I was not sure if he had, but if so that is one more for the the list of "MPs and ex-MPs".
I mean of course the one who allegedly seduced an alleged Russian spy, without being cheeky (Cough) .
In August 2025, Opik joined Reform at the 2025 Reform UK conference.
Keir Starmer has tasked a Conservative peer with writing a new planning bill to remove the ability for environmental groups to delay projects such as Heathrow’s third runway with judicial reviews.
The Guardian understands that leaving the Aarhus convention is being discussed as an option. This is an international treaty signed up to by the EU and other countries in Europe, which protects the right for campaigners to bring legal claims against large infrastructure projects such as waste plants, nuclear power stations and motorways.
Doing this would “destabilise Britain’s constitution” and silence legitimate objections, leading planning lawyers have warned.
Russia has been trying to cultivate politicians worldwide for years, and in the UK it has been remarkably even-handed with who it approached. In the Conservatives you had the likes of Boris and Osborne; Labour Mandelson, Goldsmith and Brown; the SNP Salmond, and UKIP/Reform has Farage himself and others, as shown in the Gill court case. The Lib Dems had Mike Hancock.
This does not mean any of the above did anything wrong; just that Russia was really trying to cultivate influence. Some of the interactions may have appeared totally benign to the targets. Whether they succeeded in the case of the individuals mentioned is questionable; though in the case of Gill, they definitely did.
Was there not also a Lib Dem fifty-something sex god?
I think Lembit has now joined Reform.
If I were Reform, I wouldn't touch him with a barge poll. In 2010, a year when the LibDems increased their national vote share, he managed to lose a seat* which had been held by the party (and it's predecessors) for all but four years of the previous century and a half.
* A seat, I would note, where the LibDems had previously outpolled the Conservatives 2:1.
I remember him saying he "didn't see it coming". Unusual for a LibDem as they usually have a background in community activism. Lembit's activism evidently took a different form, however.
Not surprised to hear he has joined Reform. The natural home for self-regarding egotists who are not held in high regard by anyone else.
If I recall correctly, he didn't treat his fiancee (or indeed any of his romantic partners) very well.
I've no idea if it will cause gridlock but the number of people who oppose ID cards but are happy to give up fingerprints, mugshots and their firstborn child in exchange for a trip to Disneyland Paris or Disney World Florida would make an interesting Venn diagram.
Yes in the same way that ID cards are. A lot of it is the authorities reacting over the years to events like 9/11 in exactly the way that the perpetrators wanted them to, by making life more difficult for ordinary people. That was one of the main goals of those responsible.
I've no idea if it will cause gridlock but the number of people who oppose ID cards but are happy to give up fingerprints, mugshots and their firstborn child in exchange for a trip to Disneyland Paris or Disney World Florida would make an interesting Venn diagram.
Why do you think that? I'm guessing people opposed to ID cards would also be opposed to fingerprints to visit countries.
As someone living in a country with ID cards, let’s just say that the big database is entirely the point, and that something intended for very limited use quickly becomes ubiquitous for every interaction with the both the State, and any number of private companies.
Yes, if I lived in the UK I’d be signing the petition opposing them.
I posted this last night.
Good thread on ID cards. Why don't we have legislators/civil servants who can understand and explain this, and legislate accordingly ?
1/ I don’t instinctively like the idea of ID cards. It offends my liberal sensibilities. But Digital IDs aren’t the privacy catastrophe they would have been in the 2000s... https://x.com/LawrenceLundy/status/1971543613868998952
7/ “Done right” is doing a lot of heavy lifting yes. Of course, the devil is in design. A “canonical event log” of every check could easily tip into surveillance. Guardrails are needed around logs, retention, transparency reports.
8/ Citizens need three guarantees: – Share less, prove more. – No new central database. – Errors are visible and appealable...
That means NOT giving the contract to Palantir, of course.
I don't have much confidence that we'll follow those principles.
Agreed, but if those guarantees were in place I would accept ID cards. That's why I won't sign the petition - it's too blanket anti.
I suspect that the government is trying to do too many things at once with this (dead cat, performative action on the boats, backroom deals with Palantir to try to curry favour on AI) and that's why they won't put these guarantees in place.
If ID cards really were about the right to work, it would be easy to put guardrails in place to stop them being just another way that our data gets forcibly transferred into the hands of billionaires.
They don't want to put the guardrails in place because they want to access all the data and share it and be able to transfer it to whoever the hell they like and they like the idea that they will be able to control the population more easily.
The argument about ID cards is an argument between (a) those who believe governments and bureaucracies are essentially benevolent, get things wrong by mistake and will try to correct their mistakes and (b) those who look at the reality and believe that governments and bureaucracies are much more capable of malice and much less benevolent than we like to believe and do not much care about making mistakes or the harm they will cause because they calculate, rightly, that they can get away with this.
There is lots of evidence for the latter and, frankly, not much evidence for the former. Digital ID should be voluntary so that the trusting and naive (group a) can take their chances. If they work without the downsides that others fear they will be adopted soon enough.
The argument about ID cards is a near total distraction from the real one we should be having over the principles which constrain (or fail to) government's use of personal data.
All the bad stuff will happen, irrespective of ID cards, if that argument is abandoned. Which it largely will be if and when the ID card scheme is blocked.
Yes, exactly - ID cards are a totem but the reality is the government has all our personal data anyway, and I suspect access to real-time tracking via our smartphones.
You want privacy? Leave your phone at home, and walk out with a wallet and cash.
Yes, I used to be bothered by ID cards, but really dont care much either way now.
Between smartphones (which are now effectively compulsory at work, as much is done via apps) and the ubiquity of CCTV in the UK we long since abolished privacy. Previously it wasn't practicable to follow everyone because of the vast sea of data, but now with AI and facial recognition it is already possible to track anyone and everyone.
We live in the presence of an omniscient state.
Just because you think privacy has been abolished for you doesn't mean that everyone else agrees. Please speak for yourself.
I've no idea if it will cause gridlock but the number of people who oppose ID cards but are happy to give up fingerprints, mugshots and their firstborn child in exchange for a trip to Disneyland Paris or Disney World Florida would make an interesting Venn diagram.
Why do you think that? I'm guessing people opposed to ID cards would also be opposed to fingerprints to visit countries.
People who are opposed to ID cards will largely still go through the EU process as they won’t give up their holidays on points of principle. They will cry that the UK gov can’t be trusted with our data but hand it over to an authority that that have no say in and manage to work out some justification for why one is ok and not the other.
Unless of course all the people signing the petition are going to refuse to go to Schengen countries anymore.
As someone living in a country with ID cards, let’s just say that the big database is entirely the point, and that something intended for very limited use quickly becomes ubiquitous for every interaction with the both the State, and any number of private companies.
Yes, if I lived in the UK I’d be signing the petition opposing them.
I posted this last night.
Good thread on ID cards. Why don't we have legislators/civil servants who can understand and explain this, and legislate accordingly ?
1/ I don’t instinctively like the idea of ID cards. It offends my liberal sensibilities. But Digital IDs aren’t the privacy catastrophe they would have been in the 2000s... https://x.com/LawrenceLundy/status/1971543613868998952
7/ “Done right” is doing a lot of heavy lifting yes. Of course, the devil is in design. A “canonical event log” of every check could easily tip into surveillance. Guardrails are needed around logs, retention, transparency reports.
8/ Citizens need three guarantees: – Share less, prove more. – No new central database. – Errors are visible and appealable...
That means NOT giving the contract to Palantir, of course.
I don't have much confidence that we'll follow those principles.
Agreed, but if those guarantees were in place I would accept ID cards. That's why I won't sign the petition - it's too blanket anti.
I suspect that the government is trying to do too many things at once with this (dead cat, performative action on the boats, backroom deals with Palantir to try to curry favour on AI) and that's why they won't put these guarantees in place.
If ID cards really were about the right to work, it would be easy to put guardrails in place to stop them being just another way that our data gets forcibly transferred into the hands of billionaires.
They don't want to put the guardrails in place because they want to access all the data and share it and be able to transfer it to whoever the hell they like and they like the idea that they will be able to control the population more easily.
The argument about ID cards is an argument between (a) those who believe governments and bureaucracies are essentially benevolent, get things wrong by mistake and will try to correct their mistakes and (b) those who look at the reality and believe that governments and bureaucracies are much more capable of malice and much less benevolent than we like to believe and do not much care about making mistakes or the harm they will cause because they calculate, rightly, that they can get away with this.
There is lots of evidence for the latter and, frankly, not much evidence for the former. Digital ID should be voluntary so that the trusting and naive (group a) can take their chances. If they work without the downsides that others fear they will be adopted soon enough.
The argument about ID cards is a near total distraction from the real one we should be having over the principles which constrain (or fail to) government's use of personal data.
All the bad stuff will happen, irrespective of ID cards, if that argument is abandoned. Which it largely will be if and when the ID card scheme is blocked.
As the catechism puts it,
What meanest thou by this word Sacrament?
I mean an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace given unto us, ordained by Christ himself, as a means whereby we receive the same, and a pledge to assure us thereof.
How many parts are there in a Sacrament?
Two: the outward visible sign, and the inward spiritual grace.
The card or app is the outward and visible sign, the database is the inward and spiritual (dis)grace. And although the human mind links the two, there is no particular reason to do so. (That works even for sacraments, come to think of it. During the pandemic, the church dusted off the old idea of 'Spiritual Communion'- as long as you devoutly wanted the graces attached to the bread and the wine, you didn't actually need to ingest them to get the benefit.)
The 'spiritual communion' bit is both ancient and modern. Pre reformation at many times in many places the sacrament was received (as opposed to mass attended, which was compulsory) only rarely and especially at Easter. The 'Easter communion' thing hung on well into the 20th century, centuries after the reformation.
The ultra prot tradition, now quite common even amomg Anglicans, regards the bread and wine as little more than visual aids to devotion, so all communion is of a spiritual nature anyway.
The Book of Common Prayer of 1662 (still doctrinally the CoE yardstick) commends spiritual communion where necessary and useful and says so explicitly in the communion of the sick service.
The RC service of benediction, still quite common, is an entirely spiritual communion, in the presence of but not receiving the sacrament.
And lots of good people spiritually commune in the garden, golf course and pub. The omnicompetent God is a flexible god, and the Christian belief that God loves them all equally is not a bad approach.
Russia has been trying to cultivate politicians worldwide for years, and in the UK it has been remarkably even-handed with who it approached. In the Conservatives you had the likes of Boris and Osborne; Labour Mandelson, Goldsmith and Brown; the SNP Salmond, and UKIP/Reform has Farage himself and others, as shown in the Gill court case. The Lib Dems had Mike Hancock.
This does not mean any of the above did anything wrong; just that Russia was really trying to cultivate influence. Some of the interactions may have appeared totally benign to the targets. Whether they succeeded in the case of the individuals mentioned is questionable; though in the case of Gill, they definitely did.
Was there not also a Lib Dem fifty-something sex god?
I think Lembit has now joined Reform.
If I were Reform, I wouldn't touch him with a barge poll. In 2010, a year when the LibDems increased their national vote share, he managed to lose a seat* which had been held by the party (and it's predecessors) for all but four years of the previous century and a half.
* A seat, I would note, where the LibDems had previously outpolled the Conservatives 2:1.
To be fair, the Liberal Democrats lost 13 seats in the 2010GE as the Conservatives surged back in seats like that.
But, I agree he was a somewhat self-centred candidate who thought being Lembit would be enough to win by itself.
Russia has been trying to cultivate politicians worldwide for years, and in the UK it has been remarkably even-handed with who it approached. In the Conservatives you had the likes of Boris and Osborne; Labour Mandelson, Goldsmith and Brown; the SNP Salmond, and UKIP/Reform has Farage himself and others, as shown in the Gill court case. The Lib Dems had Mike Hancock.
This does not mean any of the above did anything wrong; just that Russia was really trying to cultivate influence. Some of the interactions may have appeared totally benign to the targets. Whether they succeeded in the case of the individuals mentioned is questionable; though in the case of Gill, they definitely did.
Was there not also a Lib Dem fifty-something sex god?
I think Lembit has now joined Reform.
If I were Reform, I wouldn't touch him with a barge poll. In 2010, a year when the LibDems increased their national vote share, he managed to lose a seat* which had been held by the party (and it's predecessors) for all but four years of the previous century and a half.
* A seat, I would note, where the LibDems had previously outpolled the Conservatives 2:1.
To be fair, the Liberal Democrats lost 13 seats in the 2010GE as the Conservatives surged back in seats like that.
But, I agree he was a somewhat self-centred candidate who thought being Lembit would be enough to win by itself.
I think the Cons might have won there in 2010 anyway but Lembit made it a certainty!
We still don’t know what Johnson was up to - when actually serving as British PM - giving his security the slip and going off to meet that Russian oligarch in his Italian villa. I’d imagine MI6 know, and it will all come out one day.
The theory that Boris was in bed with the Russians is a strange one. Among the core powers, he was initially a remarkably lone voice in powerfully fighting Ukraine’s corner. I have directly heard it this month that when the war eventually ends, British contractors will be welcomed with open arms in Ukraine, and that Brits “will never understand just how many lives they saved” in 2022.
Having bring in Ukraine last month, that is very much correct.
Whatever one might have to say about Boris Johnson, Ukrainians absolutely love him. He was the face of the initial Western response to the war as far as they are concerned. And yes, there will be a lot of work in clearing up and rebuilding much of the country after the war, will be a huge opportunity for British companies.
And Boris's support of Ukraine (alongside his push for Covid vaccines) was his finest hour.
It's a terrible shame that he was also lazy and casually dishonest.
That he was lazy and casually dishonest was already known.
That neither Boris not the Conservative party generally put in any safeguards against that laziness and casual dishonesty was disastrously reckless of them.
I've no idea if it will cause gridlock but the number of people who oppose ID cards but are happy to give up fingerprints, mugshots and their firstborn child in exchange for a trip to Disneyland Paris or Disney World Florida would make an interesting Venn diagram.
Why do you think that? I'm guessing people opposed to ID cards would also be opposed to fingerprints to visit countries.
People who are opposed to ID cards will largely still go through the EU process as they won’t give up their holidays on points of principle. They will cry that the UK gov can’t be trusted with our data but hand it over to an authority that that have no say in and manage to work out some justification for why one is ok and not the other.
Unless of course all the people signing the petition are going to refuse to go to Schengen countries anymore.
Your argument appears to indicate we should have no principles that can't be ditched when convenient - just like politicians.
Off topic: I'm not averse to a good moan on here about the state of the education system, so thought I should balance that out with a bit of praise.
My school had an INSET day yesterday. In times gone by these days would be crammed full of sessions focused on the senior leadership team members' pet projects or fads, which immediately get forgotten because noone has time to implement them.
Yesterday, aside from an hour where we discussed how to respond to the London riots (we have a very diverse student body) we were trusted to use the day to deal with all the backlog of tasks that always arise in September as a result of the new school year.
This was a really conscious choice on the school's part to reduce burnout amongst staff. It is something the headteacher has agency over, and is exactly the sort of thing that will stop our school, and the system as a whole, bleeding staff. I managed to pin down my line manager to meet, meaning that I am now enthusiastic about how I can move my role forward over the next few months.
More importantly, I sorted out an assessment for students that will mean we can make sure they're in the right class to prepare for their GCSEs, and give them and home a month's warning of the assessment, rather than springing it on them. The school's decision to reduce the crap they throw our way will have a tangible positive impact on our students' experience of preparing for their maths GCSE.
I'm impressed.
I went to a junior school yesterday which was a show put on for parents/grandparents. The kids were from 4-10 I think. Each group of about 40 or 50 were introduced and came onto a stage and then sang a few lines of a meaningful (woke) song they'd learnt. As you got to the older groups the hand and body movements became more in time with the song and each other.
I have to say I found it moving. They were all so nice and kind to each other and when they took us round their classrooms they were relaxed and confident and eager to show us what they'd done
But I couldn't help this gnawing question of how these beautiful bright young children without a prejudice in the world could have turned into those flag waving morons that turned out in London two Saturdays ago.
I'm not in sympathy with the themes of the march, but it's possible to be mild 90% of the time and still nurse passionate prejudices and resentment. If we write them all off as flag-waving morons we miss the point. A lot of people are emotional about politics on the rare occasions when they pay attention to it at all. The challenge is to engage that emotion positively without expecting them suddenly to subscribe to the Guardian.
We are a people who've been told we have no culture. To me the march looked like people who are seeking their roots, and remembering (in the visibility of Islam) that those roots are Christian.
Our cultural roots are strongly intertwined with Christianity, but there are a lot of other sources too.
Indeed, and we can be proud of having led the way towards rejection of such superstitious nonsense, firstly by inventing our own Christianity-lite where adherents only have to pretend, and then by abandoning even that.
That's where the aphorism about "you don't believe in nothing, you believe in anything" has at least a kernel of truth.
Organised religions have a lot wrong with them. Most of their adherents come nowhere near living up to their ideals. We know this.
However, weak tea 'wouldn't it be good if everyone tried being nicer to each other' has definite advantages over what tends to fill its space. It's very hard, for example, to reconcile the actions of the current manifestation of Christian Nationalism with the recorded attitudes of Christ.
Just "most"?
I'd say yes.
There are a smallish number of people who actually are holier than thou. The curious thing being that they don't bang on about it, because they don't want to. Discomforting to be around, but in a good way.
I'm not familiar with many people who are holier than thou that keep to the tenet of "judge not, lest ye be judged".
Like I say, it's a smallish number. I can think of three or four unambiguously great souls I have met in my lifetime, and a lot more trying their best. And the different circles we move in definitely make a difference.
Holiness is a bit like 'suitability to run a government'; the more you say you have it, the more that you show that you haven't begun to understand the concept.
Talking of which, we may have a new Archbishop of Canterbury this week. Now there's a job where wanting the role ought to disqualify you.
None of the people I know who are holy have the tiniest idea that they might be. On the whole they give the impression of never thinking about themselves at all. As to what it is, you know it when you meet it. Oddly (I am a liberal Christian) the phenomenon, IMO, it met with amomg all religions and none, including among explicit atheists.
Choose life. Choose a job. Choose a career. Choose a family. Choose a fucking big television. Choose washing machines, cars, compact disc players, and electrical tin openers. Choose good health, low cholesterol and dental insurance. Choose fixed-interest mortgage repayments. Choose a starter home. Choose your friends. Choose leisure wear and matching luggage. Choose a three piece suite on hire purchase in a range of fucking fabrics. Choose DIY and wondering who the fuck you are on a Sunday morning. Choose sitting on that couch watching mind-numbing spirit-crushing game shows, stuffing fucking junk food into your mouth. Choose rotting away at the end of it all, pissing your last in a miserable home, nothing more than an embarrassment to the selfish, fucked-up brats you have spawned to replace yourselves. Choose your future....
The remake of Trainspotting doesn't sound very good.
Patriotic Renewal sounds like one of those comedy vehicle parties jostling on the nationalist right for a piece of the grifting action. Not that I'm suggesting Sir Keir has anything in common with them, oh no.
As ever Starmer's problem is that he sounds inauthentic, even about stuff he probably genuinely believes in. No amount of coaching or bright ideas from a young comms team (even a good one let alone the rubbish one that No 10 appears to have) fixes that.
I'm interested in understanding the various Right of Centre think tank / publication setups that keep appearing out of thin air, and who they are.
I had a mailshot from one called The Restorationist this week, who publish shorn-of-the-fluff pieces that might have come from Alan Clark or his similars a generation ago, but has something whimsical and PG Wodehouse about it.
eg The Barbaric Practices Act: Confronting National Evil Alex Coppen, Michael C R Reiners As part of the Great Repeal program, the BPA deals with the despicable moral evils our country permits: foeticide, mercy killing, animal cruelty, malignant academia, Islamic dress, porn, cousin marriage, transgenderism, doxxing, reputation destruction, gay surrogacy, paternity fraud, and more.
I wouldn't touch Reform with a barge pole. The Tory party's schmoozing of dubious Russians and some dubious Ukrainians (long before the war) was a disgrace. The cosying up to China - not our friend - by politicians of all parties is disgraceful. And now we have Starmer cosying up to Trump and his backers who are less than robust on Putin and Russia, a threat to us all.
Barely a fag paper between all of them frankly.
Who would you have us cosy up to? No-one? Striking out alone, bravely? That's fine, but a bold choice economically.
I mean, the EU remains the obvious economic partner, but we have rather burnt our teacakes with that one, haven't we?
There is a difference between having diplomatic relations with a country but being sceptical, wary, supping with a long spoon and the sort of naive desperate cosying up we are seeing all too often. British politicians have no self-respect, behaving like the fat child in class desperate to do anything just to have a "friend" who in reality despises them.
We are now 100% in agreement.
All politicians do the financial schmoozing. This is why every French President ends up prosecuted. For example.
As usual, we are heading down a path the Americans have walked before us. Which ends up with everyone in Congress (elected every two years) spending more time working a phone back to donors than actual legislation. Both parties have buildings in Washington where the politicians go to sit in a cubicle and phone people for money.
Unless of course the Congress Criter in question is wholly owned by group of “special interests” or is a multi-multi-millionaire and self funds
I've no idea if it will cause gridlock but the number of people who oppose ID cards but are happy to give up fingerprints, mugshots and their firstborn child in exchange for a trip to Disneyland Paris or Disney World Florida would make an interesting Venn diagram.
Why do you think that? I'm guessing people opposed to ID cards would also be opposed to fingerprints to visit countries.
People who are opposed to ID cards will largely still go through the EU process as they won’t give up their holidays on points of principle. They will cry that the UK gov can’t be trusted with our data but hand it over to an authority that that have no say in and manage to work out some justification for why one is ok and not the other.
Unless of course all the people signing the petition are going to refuse to go to Schengen countries anymore.
Not controversial.
I get a vote on our own country, and would oppose by principle my own country taking my ID and finger prints etc without due cause.
Visiting a foreign country is a privilege, not a right, and I don't have a vote on foreign countries' legislation.
It is entirely consistent to respect foreign countries laws when travelling there, while voting for your own country to set laws as you want them to be.
I've no idea if it will cause gridlock but the number of people who oppose ID cards but are happy to give up fingerprints, mugshots and their firstborn child in exchange for a trip to Disneyland Paris or Disney World Florida would make an interesting Venn diagram.
Why do you think that? I'm guessing people opposed to ID cards would also be opposed to fingerprints to visit countries.
People who are opposed to ID cards will largely still go through the EU process as they won’t give up their holidays on points of principle. They will cry that the UK gov can’t be trusted with our data but hand it over to an authority that that have no say in and manage to work out some justification for why one is ok and not the other.
Unless of course all the people signing the petition are going to refuse to go to Schengen countries anymore.
I'm opposed to compulsory ID cards and I'm also opposed to the new EU system requiring fingerprints. If necessary I will comply with each of them to achieve my personal objectives but I'll still oppose them. This is not inconsistent or hypocritical.
+I don't want to live in a country where the state claims the right to prevent you from doing anything - buying food; walking the streets; chatting to a friend on a park bench - unless it is satisfied you can prove you're entitled to do that & it feels like allowing you to do so.
MKW @Mark_A_K_W This is Blairite introduction of Napoleonic / European statism granting of permission to do things, in place of English Common Law right for a person to do anything that is not explicitly forbidden by statute or Common Law.
And all this is apparently because the Home Office can't police our borders.
I think this is absolutely right.
This is the best objection to ID cards but I don't see how it drives the examples Andrew Lilico cites.
I believe he is citing the example of China where insufficient social credit can lead to you being prevented from doing things we would call fundemental rights - freedom of association, freedom of movement etc
This probably sums up how a lot of people opposed to ID cards feel.
"Rupert Lowe MP @RupertLowe10 British people don’t ask for much, really. A chance to raise a family in a safe town, with a good job and an opportunity to build a bit of security for the future. A place for their children at a solid school, the odd GP appointment when they need one and a police force that will actually turn up if there is ever trouble.
In short - we just want to get on with our lives in peace, with as little interference from the state as possible.
That really isn’t too much to ask, is it?
Please just leave us alone. That’s the British way. I like it like that.
Instead, we are being dragged into a world where the Government wants to track, log, and verify every aspect of our existence. I don’t want that. The British people don’t want that. We certainly didn't vote for it.
Let’s be clear. This has got absolutely sod all to do with illegal immigration.
I’m not even going to discuss that.
It’s about control. That’s it. The slow creep of a surveillance state that says you cannot live, work, or travel without proving yourself to the system first.
It happened once, during COVID. It was a disaster, as many of us said at the time.
Putting aside the morality behind the scheme, the Government will NOT be able to do it. These people are incompetent, the state is incompetent, it is all incompetent.
Do you trust them to effectively run such a scheme? Without leaks, breaches and cyber attacks?
It will be an unrelenting shitshow - I promise you that.
And what? We don’t have anything else to be focusing on? The country is such a utopia that vast amounts of Government time, energy and resource will now be spent fighting to implement this scheme? Really?
When it is introduced, it will grow and grow. We will never get rid of it.
We must draw a line in the sand, now. Sign the petition, write to your MP, make your voice heard. It does matter.
As an MP, I will do everything in my power to fight this - in Parliament and through Restore Britain, where plans are already underway to expose and fight the plans."
This probably sums up how a lot of people opposed to ID cards feel.
"Rupert Lowe MP @RupertLowe10 British people don’t ask for much, really. A chance to raise a family in a safe town, with a good job and an opportunity to build a bit of security for the future. A place for their children at a solid school, the odd GP appointment when they need one and a police force that will actually turn up if there is ever trouble.
In short - we just want to get on with our lives in peace, with as little interference from the state as possible.
That really isn’t too much to ask, is it?
Please just leave us alone. That’s the British way. I like it like that.
Instead, we are being dragged into a world where the Government wants to track, log, and verify every aspect of our existence. I don’t want that. The British people don’t want that. We certainly didn't vote for it.
Let’s be clear. This has got absolutely sod all to do with illegal immigration.
I’m not even going to discuss that.
It’s about control. That’s it. The slow creep of a surveillance state that says you cannot live, work, or travel without proving yourself to the system first.
It happened once, during COVID. It was a disaster, as many of us said at the time.
Putting aside the morality behind the scheme, the Government will NOT be able to do it. These people are incompetent, the state is incompetent, it is all incompetent.
Do you trust them to effectively run such a scheme? Without leaks, breaches and cyber attacks?
It will be an unrelenting shitshow - I promise you that.
And what? We don’t have anything else to be focusing on? The country is such a utopia that vast amounts of Government time, energy and resource will now be spent fighting to implement this scheme? Really?
When it is introduced, it will grow and grow. We will never get rid of it.
We must draw a line in the sand, now. Sign the petition, write to your MP, make your voice heard. It does matter.
As an MP, I will do everything in my power to fight this - in Parliament and through Restore Britain, where plans are already underway to expose and fight the plans."
This probably sums up how a lot of people opposed to ID cards feel.
"Rupert Lowe MP @RupertLowe10 British people don’t ask for much, really. A chance to raise a family in a safe town, with a good job and an opportunity to build a bit of security for the future. A place for their children at a solid school, the odd GP appointment when they need one and a police force that will actually turn up if there is ever trouble.
In short - we just want to get on with our lives in peace, with as little interference from the state as possible.
That really isn’t too much to ask, is it?
Please just leave us alone. That’s the British way. I like it like that.
Instead, we are being dragged into a world where the Government wants to track, log, and verify every aspect of our existence. I don’t want that. The British people don’t want that. We certainly didn't vote for it.
Let’s be clear. This has got absolutely sod all to do with illegal immigration.
I’m not even going to discuss that.
It’s about control. That’s it. The slow creep of a surveillance state that says you cannot live, work, or travel without proving yourself to the system first.
It happened once, during COVID. It was a disaster, as many of us said at the time.
Putting aside the morality behind the scheme, the Government will NOT be able to do it. These people are incompetent, the state is incompetent, it is all incompetent.
Do you trust them to effectively run such a scheme? Without leaks, breaches and cyber attacks?
It will be an unrelenting shitshow - I promise you that.
And what? We don’t have anything else to be focusing on? The country is such a utopia that vast amounts of Government time, energy and resource will now be spent fighting to implement this scheme? Really?
When it is introduced, it will grow and grow. We will never get rid of it.
We must draw a line in the sand, now. Sign the petition, write to your MP, make your voice heard. It does matter.
As an MP, I will do everything in my power to fight this - in Parliament and through Restore Britain, where plans are already underway to expose and fight the plans."
Keir Starmer has tasked a Conservative peer with writing a new planning bill to remove the ability for environmental groups to delay projects such as Heathrow’s third runway with judicial reviews.
The Guardian understands that leaving the Aarhus convention is being discussed as an option. This is an international treaty signed up to by the EU and other countries in Europe, which protects the right for campaigners to bring legal claims against large infrastructure projects such as waste plants, nuclear power stations and motorways.
Doing this would “destabilise Britain’s constitution” and silence legitimate objections, leading planning lawyers have warned.
If people start suggesting UK ID cards will be used for social credits as in China then I’m calling it hysterical nonsense . I get some people don’t like ID cards but really the arguments against aren’t strengthened by these examples with China .
This probably sums up how a lot of people opposed to ID cards feel.
"Rupert Lowe MP @RupertLowe10 British people don’t ask for much, really. A chance to raise a family in a safe town, with a good job and an opportunity to build a bit of security for the future. A place for their children at a solid school, the odd GP appointment when they need one and a police force that will actually turn up if there is ever trouble.
In short - we just want to get on with our lives in peace, with as little interference from the state as possible.
That really isn’t too much to ask, is it?
Please just leave us alone. That’s the British way. I like it like that.
Instead, we are being dragged into a world where the Government wants to track, log, and verify every aspect of our existence. I don’t want that. The British people don’t want that. We certainly didn't vote for it.
Let’s be clear. This has got absolutely sod all to do with illegal immigration.
I’m not even going to discuss that.
It’s about control. That’s it. The slow creep of a surveillance state that says you cannot live, work, or travel without proving yourself to the system first.
It happened once, during COVID. It was a disaster, as many of us said at the time.
Putting aside the morality behind the scheme, the Government will NOT be able to do it. These people are incompetent, the state is incompetent, it is all incompetent.
Do you trust them to effectively run such a scheme? Without leaks, breaches and cyber attacks?
It will be an unrelenting shitshow - I promise you that.
And what? We don’t have anything else to be focusing on? The country is such a utopia that vast amounts of Government time, energy and resource will now be spent fighting to implement this scheme? Really?
When it is introduced, it will grow and grow. We will never get rid of it.
We must draw a line in the sand, now. Sign the petition, write to your MP, make your voice heard. It does matter.
As an MP, I will do everything in my power to fight this - in Parliament and through Restore Britain, where plans are already underway to expose and fight the plans."
That, in a nutshell, is why Labour and the Tories are going to get smashed at the next election unless Reform does something incredibly toxic in the meantime.
Keir Starmer has tasked a Conservative peer with writing a new planning bill to remove the ability for environmental groups to delay projects such as Heathrow’s third runway with judicial reviews.
The Guardian understands that leaving the Aarhus convention is being discussed as an option. This is an international treaty signed up to by the EU and other countries in Europe, which protects the right for campaigners to bring legal claims against large infrastructure projects such as waste plants, nuclear power stations and motorways.
Doing this would “destabilise Britain’s constitution” and silence legitimate objections, leading planning lawyers have warned.
Planning lawyers being those that make a living from multiple planning appeals, right?
If they want to remove the ability of anyone to delay projects the pass a bill mandating the construction. That was how railways were built in the 19th century. Primary legislation can’t be judicially reviewed.
This probably sums up how a lot of people opposed to ID cards feel.
"Rupert Lowe MP @RupertLowe10 British people don’t ask for much, really. A chance to raise a family in a safe town, with a good job and an opportunity to build a bit of security for the future. A place for their children at a solid school, the odd GP appointment when they need one and a police force that will actually turn up if there is ever trouble.
In short - we just want to get on with our lives in peace, with as little interference from the state as possible.
That really isn’t too much to ask, is it?
Please just leave us alone. That’s the British way. I like it like that.
Instead, we are being dragged into a world where the Government wants to track, log, and verify every aspect of our existence. I don’t want that. The British people don’t want that. We certainly didn't vote for it.
Let’s be clear. This has got absolutely sod all to do with illegal immigration.
I’m not even going to discuss that.
It’s about control. That’s it. The slow creep of a surveillance state that says you cannot live, work, or travel without proving yourself to the system first.
It happened once, during COVID. It was a disaster, as many of us said at the time.
Putting aside the morality behind the scheme, the Government will NOT be able to do it. These people are incompetent, the state is incompetent, it is all incompetent.
Do you trust them to effectively run such a scheme? Without leaks, breaches and cyber attacks?
It will be an unrelenting shitshow - I promise you that.
And what? We don’t have anything else to be focusing on? The country is such a utopia that vast amounts of Government time, energy and resource will now be spent fighting to implement this scheme? Really?
When it is introduced, it will grow and grow. We will never get rid of it.
We must draw a line in the sand, now. Sign the petition, write to your MP, make your voice heard. It does matter.
As an MP, I will do everything in my power to fight this - in Parliament and through Restore Britain, where plans are already underway to expose and fight the plans."
That, in a nutshell, is why Labour and the Tories are going to get smashed at the next election unless Reform does something incredibly toxic in the meantime.
So basically we want our UK ICE team carte blanc to chuck everyone of the wrong color out of the uk.
Hint I think a big reason for having an ID card is protecting you from Reform’s plans.
If people start suggesting UK ID cards will be used for social credits as in China then I’m calling it hysterical nonsense . I get some people don’t like ID cards but really the arguments against aren’t strengthened by these examples with China .
The ID card system and database provides the required platform for a social credit system. It comes down to your faith in the government - of whatever party, going forward - to resist the temptation to exert control by implementing such a system.
It's far from hysterical to believe it would be better to make sure the government is never in that position, that the tools for a social credit system are denied to them.
This probably sums up how a lot of people opposed to ID cards feel.
"Rupert Lowe MP @RupertLowe10 British people don’t ask for much, really. A chance to raise a family in a safe town, with a good job and an opportunity to build a bit of security for the future. A place for their children at a solid school, the odd GP appointment when they need one and a police force that will actually turn up if there is ever trouble.
In short - we just want to get on with our lives in peace, with as little interference from the state as possible.
That really isn’t too much to ask, is it?
Please just leave us alone. That’s the British way. I like it like that.
Instead, we are being dragged into a world where the Government wants to track, log, and verify every aspect of our existence. I don’t want that. The British people don’t want that. We certainly didn't vote for it.
Let’s be clear. This has got absolutely sod all to do with illegal immigration.
I’m not even going to discuss that.
It’s about control. That’s it. The slow creep of a surveillance state that says you cannot live, work, or travel without proving yourself to the system first.
It happened once, during COVID. It was a disaster, as many of us said at the time.
Putting aside the morality behind the scheme, the Government will NOT be able to do it. These people are incompetent, the state is incompetent, it is all incompetent.
Do you trust them to effectively run such a scheme? Without leaks, breaches and cyber attacks?
It will be an unrelenting shitshow - I promise you that.
And what? We don’t have anything else to be focusing on? The country is such a utopia that vast amounts of Government time, energy and resource will now be spent fighting to implement this scheme? Really?
When it is introduced, it will grow and grow. We will never get rid of it.
We must draw a line in the sand, now. Sign the petition, write to your MP, make your voice heard. It does matter.
As an MP, I will do everything in my power to fight this - in Parliament and through Restore Britain, where plans are already underway to expose and fight the plans."
That, in a nutshell, is why Labour and the Tories are going to get smashed at the next election unless Reform does something incredibly toxic in the meantime.
So basically we want our UK ICE team carte blanc to chuck everyone of the wrong color out of the uk.
Hint I think a big reason for having an ID card is protecting you from Reform’s plans.
Hint. I think the possibility of a Reform Government is a huge argument AGAINST having ID cards. If they really do swing well to the right in actions as well as words once in power then the last thing you should be looking to do is give them more tools of control.
So who is going to be out first, Amorim or Starmer?
Amorim already giving another good push to be chopped.
Think its now a done deal.
They really could have done with beating West Ham to it and getting Nuno in as a replacement but I guess they have to give Starmer to the end of the conference.
This probably sums up how a lot of people opposed to ID cards feel.
"Rupert Lowe MP @RupertLowe10 British people don’t ask for much, really. A chance to raise a family in a safe town, with a good job and an opportunity to build a bit of security for the future. A place for their children at a solid school, the odd GP appointment when they need one and a police force that will actually turn up if there is ever trouble.
In short - we just want to get on with our lives in peace, with as little interference from the state as possible.
That really isn’t too much to ask, is it?
Please just leave us alone. That’s the British way. I like it like that.
Instead, we are being dragged into a world where the Government wants to track, log, and verify every aspect of our existence. I don’t want that. The British people don’t want that. We certainly didn't vote for it.
Let’s be clear. This has got absolutely sod all to do with illegal immigration.
I’m not even going to discuss that.
It’s about control. That’s it. The slow creep of a surveillance state that says you cannot live, work, or travel without proving yourself to the system first.
It happened once, during COVID. It was a disaster, as many of us said at the time.
Putting aside the morality behind the scheme, the Government will NOT be able to do it. These people are incompetent, the state is incompetent, it is all incompetent.
Do you trust them to effectively run such a scheme? Without leaks, breaches and cyber attacks?
It will be an unrelenting shitshow - I promise you that.
And what? We don’t have anything else to be focusing on? The country is such a utopia that vast amounts of Government time, energy and resource will now be spent fighting to implement this scheme? Really?
When it is introduced, it will grow and grow. We will never get rid of it.
We must draw a line in the sand, now. Sign the petition, write to your MP, make your voice heard. It does matter.
As an MP, I will do everything in my power to fight this - in Parliament and through Restore Britain, where plans are already underway to expose and fight the plans."
Zelensky says that a Patriot system from Israel has been in Ukraine for a month, with two more expected later this year. Israel must be very confident that neither Iran, Hezbollah or Hamas will be in a position to launch an attack of any scale against them for some considerable time.
I've no idea if it will cause gridlock but the number of people who oppose ID cards but are happy to give up fingerprints, mugshots and their firstborn child in exchange for a trip to Disneyland Paris or Disney World Florida would make an interesting Venn diagram.
Why do you think that? I'm guessing people opposed to ID cards would also be opposed to fingerprints to visit countries.
People who are opposed to ID cards will largely still go through the EU process as they won’t give up their holidays on points of principle. They will cry that the UK gov can’t be trusted with our data but hand it over to an authority that that have no say in and manage to work out some justification for why one is ok and not the other.
Unless of course all the people signing the petition are going to refuse to go to Schengen countries anymore.
I'm opposed to compulsory ID cards and I'm also opposed to the new EU system requiring fingerprints. If necessary I will comply with each of them to achieve my personal objectives but I'll still oppose them. This is not inconsistent or hypocritical.
I will abide by the new EU system as I don't fancy having to smuggle myself into Schengen.
I won't ever get a BritCard, or whatever it is called. I suspect this won't inconvenience me much, being self employed, and because I'm pretty sure millions of others wont comply...
So who is going to be out first, Amorim or Starmer?
Amorim already giving another good push to be chopped.
Think its now a done deal.
They really could have done with beating West Ham to it and getting Nuno in as a replacement but I guess they have to give Starmer to the end of the conference.
I'm not confident we'll stay up come the end of this season.
Zelensky says that a Patriot system from Israel has been in Ukraine for a month, with two more expected later this year. Israel must be very confident that neither Iran, Hezbollah or Hamas will be in a position to launch an attack of any scale against them for some considerable time.
Something significant has clearly changed expectations in the both ME and the Russian/Ukrainian conflict recently.
The success of Israel against literally all its regional foes and the catastrophic failure of the Russian summer offensive must play a part. But it feels as if something more significant is at play. Behind the scenes security guarantees for both? Threats of secondary sanctions?
If people start suggesting UK ID cards will be used for social credits as in China then I’m calling it hysterical nonsense . I get some people don’t like ID cards but really the arguments against aren’t strengthened by these examples with China .
The point being that the social credit system in China cannot work without digital ID.
No we are not now going to start doing that sort of thing. Probably not even under a more right wing Government like Reform. But do you really think that we will always have the luxury of Governments that are either so incompetant or benign that they won't think about imposing restrictions.
As others have aready mentioned, look at what happened during Covid lockdowns. How much easier would it have been for the authorities (and more dangerous for the public) if we had all been forced to carry digital ID at that point?
Mission creep and the abuse of power is a real thing in the British State. As I said yesterday just look at the abuses of the RIPA law under Blair and Brown - and continuing even to today. Despite the law supposedly being for the protection of National Security and serious crimes like People trafficing, local councils used RIPA laws 8,500 times last year to allow for covert surveillance.
This probably sums up how a lot of people opposed to ID cards feel.
"Rupert Lowe MP @RupertLowe10 British people don’t ask for much, really. A chance to raise a family in a safe town, with a good job and an opportunity to build a bit of security for the future. A place for their children at a solid school, the odd GP appointment when they need one and a police force that will actually turn up if there is ever trouble.
In short - we just want to get on with our lives in peace, with as little interference from the state as possible.
That really isn’t too much to ask, is it?
Please just leave us alone. That’s the British way. I like it like that.
Instead, we are being dragged into a world where the Government wants to track, log, and verify every aspect of our existence. I don’t want that. The British people don’t want that. We certainly didn't vote for it.
Let’s be clear. This has got absolutely sod all to do with illegal immigration.
I’m not even going to discuss that.
It’s about control. That’s it. The slow creep of a surveillance state that says you cannot live, work, or travel without proving yourself to the system first.
It happened once, during COVID. It was a disaster, as many of us said at the time.
Putting aside the morality behind the scheme, the Government will NOT be able to do it. These people are incompetent, the state is incompetent, it is all incompetent.
Do you trust them to effectively run such a scheme? Without leaks, breaches and cyber attacks?
It will be an unrelenting shitshow - I promise you that.
And what? We don’t have anything else to be focusing on? The country is such a utopia that vast amounts of Government time, energy and resource will now be spent fighting to implement this scheme? Really?
When it is introduced, it will grow and grow. We will never get rid of it.
We must draw a line in the sand, now. Sign the petition, write to your MP, make your voice heard. It does matter.
As an MP, I will do everything in my power to fight this - in Parliament and through Restore Britain, where plans are already underway to expose and fight the plans."
If I thought that these words were a typical example of what the new right stood for and how they would govern and represented the traditional decency and moderation of it members and supporters I would cheerfully vote for them.
I don't.
And the new right (Reform, Loweists, UKIP, Restore Britain, Lozza Fox, flag raisers, 'extreme', 'far', Robinsonists etc) show no sign whatsoever of being, in reality, these sorts of people.
BTW, the single greatest objection to ID is the real doubt there is over government's competence to run it without endangering the public.
If people start suggesting UK ID cards will be used for social credits as in China then I’m calling it hysterical nonsense . I get some people don’t like ID cards but really the arguments against aren’t strengthened by these examples with China .
The point being that the social credit system in China cannot work without digital ID.
No we are not now going to start doing that sort of thing. Probably not even under a more right wing Government like Reform. But do you really think that we will always have the luxury of Governments that are either so incompetant or benign that they won't think about imposing restrictions.
As others have aready mentioned, look at what happened during Covid lockdowns. How much easier would it have been for the authorities (and more dangerous for the public) if we had all been forced to carry digital ID at that point?
Mission creep and the abuse of power is a real thing in the British State. As I said yesterday just look at the abuses of the RIPA law under Blair and Brown - and continuing even to today. Despite the law supposedly being for the protection of National Security and serious crimes like People trafficing, local councils used RIPA laws 8,500 times last year to allow for covert surveillance.
The fact that we've tended to avoid giving too much power to the state has almost certainly saved us from massive death and destruction during revolutions, the like of which tend to occur in opposition to statist systems.....
I had an outstanding homemade mushroom lasagna, two glasses of the excellent local white wine, a decent sized piece of grandmother’s lemon cake, and a coffee, plus a bottle of mineral water, all for €27. And made it back before the heavens opened. The dog is fine.
This probably sums up how a lot of people opposed to ID cards feel.
"Rupert Lowe MP @RupertLowe10 British people don’t ask for much, really. A chance to raise a family in a safe town, with a good job and an opportunity to build a bit of security for the future. A place for their children at a solid school, the odd GP appointment when they need one and a police force that will actually turn up if there is ever trouble.
In short - we just want to get on with our lives in peace, with as little interference from the state as possible.
That really isn’t too much to ask, is it?
Please just leave us alone. That’s the British way. I like it like that.
Instead, we are being dragged into a world where the Government wants to track, log, and verify every aspect of our existence. I don’t want that. The British people don’t want that. We certainly didn't vote for it.
Let’s be clear. This has got absolutely sod all to do with illegal immigration.
I’m not even going to discuss that.
It’s about control. That’s it. The slow creep of a surveillance state that says you cannot live, work, or travel without proving yourself to the system first.
It happened once, during COVID. It was a disaster, as many of us said at the time.
Putting aside the morality behind the scheme, the Government will NOT be able to do it. These people are incompetent, the state is incompetent, it is all incompetent.
Do you trust them to effectively run such a scheme? Without leaks, breaches and cyber attacks?
It will be an unrelenting shitshow - I promise you that.
And what? We don’t have anything else to be focusing on? The country is such a utopia that vast amounts of Government time, energy and resource will now be spent fighting to implement this scheme? Really?
When it is introduced, it will grow and grow. We will never get rid of it.
We must draw a line in the sand, now. Sign the petition, write to your MP, make your voice heard. It does matter.
As an MP, I will do everything in my power to fight this - in Parliament and through Restore Britain, where plans are already underway to expose and fight the plans."
If I thought that these words were a typical example of what the new right stood for and how they would govern and represented the traditional decency and moderation of it members and supporters I would cheerfully vote for them.
I don't.
And the new right (Reform, Loweists, UKIP, Restore Britain, Lozza Fox, flag raisers, 'extreme', 'far', Robinsonists etc) show no sign whatsoever of being, in reality, these sorts of people.
BTW, the single greatest objection to ID is the real doubt there is over government's competence to run it without endangering the public.
Agree with all of this. I am no fan of Reform and its offshoots but sometimes, in spite of other objections, someone says something worth crediting and Lowe is absolutely right in this.
This probably sums up how a lot of people opposed to ID cards feel.
"Rupert Lowe MP @RupertLowe10 British people don’t ask for much, really. A chance to raise a family in a safe town, with a good job and an opportunity to build a bit of security for the future. A place for their children at a solid school, the odd GP appointment when they need one and a police force that will actually turn up if there is ever trouble.
In short - we just want to get on with our lives in peace, with as little interference from the state as possible.
That really isn’t too much to ask, is it?
Please just leave us alone. That’s the British way. I like it like that.
Instead, we are being dragged into a world where the Government wants to track, log, and verify every aspect of our existence. I don’t want that. The British people don’t want that. We certainly didn't vote for it.
Let’s be clear. This has got absolutely sod all to do with illegal immigration.
I’m not even going to discuss that.
It’s about control. That’s it. The slow creep of a surveillance state that says you cannot live, work, or travel without proving yourself to the system first.
It happened once, during COVID. It was a disaster, as many of us said at the time.
Putting aside the morality behind the scheme, the Government will NOT be able to do it. These people are incompetent, the state is incompetent, it is all incompetent.
Do you trust them to effectively run such a scheme? Without leaks, breaches and cyber attacks?
It will be an unrelenting shitshow - I promise you that.
And what? We don’t have anything else to be focusing on? The country is such a utopia that vast amounts of Government time, energy and resource will now be spent fighting to implement this scheme? Really?
When it is introduced, it will grow and grow. We will never get rid of it.
We must draw a line in the sand, now. Sign the petition, write to your MP, make your voice heard. It does matter.
As an MP, I will do everything in my power to fight this - in Parliament and through Restore Britain, where plans are already underway to expose and fight the plans."
Refreshing to hear Lowe say something has sod all to do with illegal immigration, usually he’s never done saying everything wrong with this country has to do with illegal immigration.
Zelensky says that a Patriot system from Israel has been in Ukraine for a month, with two more expected later this year. Israel must be very confident that neither Iran, Hezbollah or Hamas will be in a position to launch an attack of any scale against them for some considerable time.
Israel has been upgrading from Patriot - to David's Sling and Iron Dome - so they are surplus to requirement.
I had an outstanding homemade mushroom lasagna, two glasses of the excellent local white wine, a decent sized piece of grandmother’s lemon cake, and a coffee, plus a bottle of mineral water, all for €27. And made it back before the heavens opened. The dog is fine.
Google suggests you are in Arquà Petrarca and eating at Casa del Petrarca.
I've no idea if it will cause gridlock but the number of people who oppose ID cards but are happy to give up fingerprints, mugshots and their firstborn child in exchange for a trip to Disneyland Paris or Disney World Florida would make an interesting Venn diagram.
Why do you think that? I'm guessing people opposed to ID cards would also be opposed to fingerprints to visit countries.
People who are opposed to ID cards will largely still go through the EU process as they won’t give up their holidays on points of principle. They will cry that the UK gov can’t be trusted with our data but hand it over to an authority that that have no say in and manage to work out some justification for why one is ok and not the other.
Unless of course all the people signing the petition are going to refuse to go to Schengen countries anymore.
The EU has been behind the introduction of rules and laws on the correct handling of data. GDPR and all that. These include
1) protecting data 2) controlling access to data 3) rights to have only accurate and relevant data stored 4) segmented and audited access to data - access is only available to relevant data, and audited. So, sorry, your local council can’t access to your NHS records when looking for flytippers. 5) right to be forgotten
I work with personal data - these rules are sensible, modern and fundamentally *decent*
The fact that the Home Office has previously tried, in connection with ID cards, to demand an exemption from such laws demonstrates something - their stupidly and incompetence. They are unfit to be allowed control of personal data, as it is.
This probably sums up how a lot of people opposed to ID cards feel.
"Rupert Lowe MP @RupertLowe10 British people don’t ask for much, really. A chance to raise a family in a safe town, with a good job and an opportunity to build a bit of security for the future. A place for their children at a solid school, the odd GP appointment when they need one and a police force that will actually turn up if there is ever trouble.
In short - we just want to get on with our lives in peace, with as little interference from the state as possible.
That really isn’t too much to ask, is it?
Please just leave us alone. That’s the British way. I like it like that.
Instead, we are being dragged into a world where the Government wants to track, log, and verify every aspect of our existence. I don’t want that. The British people don’t want that. We certainly didn't vote for it.
Let’s be clear. This has got absolutely sod all to do with illegal immigration.
I’m not even going to discuss that.
It’s about control. That’s it. The slow creep of a surveillance state that says you cannot live, work, or travel without proving yourself to the system first.
It happened once, during COVID. It was a disaster, as many of us said at the time.
Putting aside the morality behind the scheme, the Government will NOT be able to do it. These people are incompetent, the state is incompetent, it is all incompetent.
Do you trust them to effectively run such a scheme? Without leaks, breaches and cyber attacks?
It will be an unrelenting shitshow - I promise you that.
And what? We don’t have anything else to be focusing on? The country is such a utopia that vast amounts of Government time, energy and resource will now be spent fighting to implement this scheme? Really?
When it is introduced, it will grow and grow. We will never get rid of it.
We must draw a line in the sand, now. Sign the petition, write to your MP, make your voice heard. It does matter.
As an MP, I will do everything in my power to fight this - in Parliament and through Restore Britain, where plans are already underway to expose and fight the plans."
Refreshing to hear Lowe say something has sod all to do with illegal immigration, usually he’s never done saying everything wrong with this country has to do with illegal immigration.
It would be good to think that Reform would have the nous to govern in a way that protected civil liberties.
In practice, I expect them to be so clueless that the Civil Service will run rings round them. We will get what senior civil servants want.
This probably sums up how a lot of people opposed to ID cards feel.
"Rupert Lowe MP @RupertLowe10 British people don’t ask for much, really. A chance to raise a family in a safe town, with a good job and an opportunity to build a bit of security for the future. A place for their children at a solid school, the odd GP appointment when they need one and a police force that will actually turn up if there is ever trouble.
In short - we just want to get on with our lives in peace, with as little interference from the state as possible.
That really isn’t too much to ask, is it?
Please just leave us alone. That’s the British way. I like it like that.
Instead, we are being dragged into a world where the Government wants to track, log, and verify every aspect of our existence. I don’t want that. The British people don’t want that. We certainly didn't vote for it.
Let’s be clear. This has got absolutely sod all to do with illegal immigration.
I’m not even going to discuss that.
It’s about control. That’s it. The slow creep of a surveillance state that says you cannot live, work, or travel without proving yourself to the system first.
It happened once, during COVID. It was a disaster, as many of us said at the time.
Putting aside the morality behind the scheme, the Government will NOT be able to do it. These people are incompetent, the state is incompetent, it is all incompetent.
Do you trust them to effectively run such a scheme? Without leaks, breaches and cyber attacks?
It will be an unrelenting shitshow - I promise you that.
And what? We don’t have anything else to be focusing on? The country is such a utopia that vast amounts of Government time, energy and resource will now be spent fighting to implement this scheme? Really?
When it is introduced, it will grow and grow. We will never get rid of it.
We must draw a line in the sand, now. Sign the petition, write to your MP, make your voice heard. It does matter.
As an MP, I will do everything in my power to fight this - in Parliament and through Restore Britain, where plans are already underway to expose and fight the plans."
This probably sums up how a lot of people opposed to ID cards feel.
"Rupert Lowe MP @RupertLowe10 British people don’t ask for much, really. A chance to raise a family in a safe town, with a good job and an opportunity to build a bit of security for the future. A place for their children at a solid school, the odd GP appointment when they need one and a police force that will actually turn up if there is ever trouble.
In short - we just want to get on with our lives in peace, with as little interference from the state as possible.
That really isn’t too much to ask, is it?
Please just leave us alone. That’s the British way. I like it like that.
Instead, we are being dragged into a world where the Government wants to track, log, and verify every aspect of our existence. I don’t want that. The British people don’t want that. We certainly didn't vote for it.
Let’s be clear. This has got absolutely sod all to do with illegal immigration.
I’m not even going to discuss that.
It’s about control. That’s it. The slow creep of a surveillance state that says you cannot live, work, or travel without proving yourself to the system first.
It happened once, during COVID. It was a disaster, as many of us said at the time.
Putting aside the morality behind the scheme, the Government will NOT be able to do it. These people are incompetent, the state is incompetent, it is all incompetent.
Do you trust them to effectively run such a scheme? Without leaks, breaches and cyber attacks?
It will be an unrelenting shitshow - I promise you that.
And what? We don’t have anything else to be focusing on? The country is such a utopia that vast amounts of Government time, energy and resource will now be spent fighting to implement this scheme? Really?
When it is introduced, it will grow and grow. We will never get rid of it.
We must draw a line in the sand, now. Sign the petition, write to your MP, make your voice heard. It does matter.
As an MP, I will do everything in my power to fight this - in Parliament and through Restore Britain, where plans are already underway to expose and fight the plans."
That, in a nutshell, is why Labour and the Tories are going to get smashed at the next election unless Reform does something incredibly toxic in the meantime.
How have we reached the point where Rupert Lowe is the voice of reason?
This probably sums up how a lot of people opposed to ID cards feel.
"Rupert Lowe MP @RupertLowe10 British people don’t ask for much, really. A chance to raise a family in a safe town, with a good job and an opportunity to build a bit of security for the future. A place for their children at a solid school, the odd GP appointment when they need one and a police force that will actually turn up if there is ever trouble.
In short - we just want to get on with our lives in peace, with as little interference from the state as possible.
That really isn’t too much to ask, is it?
Please just leave us alone. That’s the British way. I like it like that.
Instead, we are being dragged into a world where the Government wants to track, log, and verify every aspect of our existence. I don’t want that. The British people don’t want that. We certainly didn't vote for it.
Let’s be clear. This has got absolutely sod all to do with illegal immigration.
I’m not even going to discuss that.
It’s about control. That’s it. The slow creep of a surveillance state that says you cannot live, work, or travel without proving yourself to the system first.
It happened once, during COVID. It was a disaster, as many of us said at the time.
Putting aside the morality behind the scheme, the Government will NOT be able to do it. These people are incompetent, the state is incompetent, it is all incompetent.
Do you trust them to effectively run such a scheme? Without leaks, breaches and cyber attacks?
It will be an unrelenting shitshow - I promise you that.
And what? We don’t have anything else to be focusing on? The country is such a utopia that vast amounts of Government time, energy and resource will now be spent fighting to implement this scheme? Really?
When it is introduced, it will grow and grow. We will never get rid of it.
We must draw a line in the sand, now. Sign the petition, write to your MP, make your voice heard. It does matter.
As an MP, I will do everything in my power to fight this - in Parliament and through Restore Britain, where plans are already underway to expose and fight the plans."
That, in a nutshell, is why Labour and the Tories are going to get smashed at the next election unless Reform does something incredibly toxic in the meantime.
So basically we want our UK ICE team carte blanc to chuck everyone of the wrong color out of the uk.
Hint I think a big reason for having an ID card is protecting you from Reform’s plans.
Hint. I think the possibility of a Reform Government is a huge argument AGAINST having ID cards. If they really do swing well to the right in actions as well as words once in power then the last thing you should be looking to do is give them more tools of control.
Hmmm.
So a list, for the entire country, of who is and isn’t a foreigner. And where they live. And their religion.
This probably sums up how a lot of people opposed to ID cards feel.
"Rupert Lowe MP @RupertLowe10 British people don’t ask for much, really. A chance to raise a family in a safe town, with a good job and an opportunity to build a bit of security for the future. A place for their children at a solid school, the odd GP appointment when they need one and a police force that will actually turn up if there is ever trouble.
In short - we just want to get on with our lives in peace, with as little interference from the state as possible.
That really isn’t too much to ask, is it?
Please just leave us alone. That’s the British way. I like it like that.
Instead, we are being dragged into a world where the Government wants to track, log, and verify every aspect of our existence. I don’t want that. The British people don’t want that. We certainly didn't vote for it.
Let’s be clear. This has got absolutely sod all to do with illegal immigration.
I’m not even going to discuss that.
It’s about control. That’s it. The slow creep of a surveillance state that says you cannot live, work, or travel without proving yourself to the system first.
It happened once, during COVID. It was a disaster, as many of us said at the time.
Putting aside the morality behind the scheme, the Government will NOT be able to do it. These people are incompetent, the state is incompetent, it is all incompetent.
Do you trust them to effectively run such a scheme? Without leaks, breaches and cyber attacks?
It will be an unrelenting shitshow - I promise you that.
And what? We don’t have anything else to be focusing on? The country is such a utopia that vast amounts of Government time, energy and resource will now be spent fighting to implement this scheme? Really?
When it is introduced, it will grow and grow. We will never get rid of it.
We must draw a line in the sand, now. Sign the petition, write to your MP, make your voice heard. It does matter.
As an MP, I will do everything in my power to fight this - in Parliament and through Restore Britain, where plans are already underway to expose and fight the plans."
This probably sums up how a lot of people opposed to ID cards feel.
"Rupert Lowe MP @RupertLowe10 British people don’t ask for much, really. A chance to raise a family in a safe town, with a good job and an opportunity to build a bit of security for the future. A place for their children at a solid school, the odd GP appointment when they need one and a police force that will actually turn up if there is ever trouble.
In short - we just want to get on with our lives in peace, with as little interference from the state as possible.
That really isn’t too much to ask, is it?
Please just leave us alone. That’s the British way. I like it like that.
Instead, we are being dragged into a world where the Government wants to track, log, and verify every aspect of our existence. I don’t want that. The British people don’t want that. We certainly didn't vote for it.
Let’s be clear. This has got absolutely sod all to do with illegal immigration.
I’m not even going to discuss that.
It’s about control. That’s it. The slow creep of a surveillance state that says you cannot live, work, or travel without proving yourself to the system first.
It happened once, during COVID. It was a disaster, as many of us said at the time.
Putting aside the morality behind the scheme, the Government will NOT be able to do it. These people are incompetent, the state is incompetent, it is all incompetent.
Do you trust them to effectively run such a scheme? Without leaks, breaches and cyber attacks?
It will be an unrelenting shitshow - I promise you that.
And what? We don’t have anything else to be focusing on? The country is such a utopia that vast amounts of Government time, energy and resource will now be spent fighting to implement this scheme? Really?
When it is introduced, it will grow and grow. We will never get rid of it.
We must draw a line in the sand, now. Sign the petition, write to your MP, make your voice heard. It does matter.
As an MP, I will do everything in my power to fight this - in Parliament and through Restore Britain, where plans are already underway to expose and fight the plans."
It is mad situation that Starmer has dragged us to, that Lowe is the voice of reason.
Why is the last roll of the dice from the process state always sodding ID cards?
I suggest we have a piLot scheme. Anyone working for the govt needs a BritCard.
If after 25 years there have been no data leaks, nothing untoward happen, expand it to NHS workers.
Then in about 50 years time, maybe see how it has worked?
Also, for the administrators of the scheme, a further law.
Unlimited personal fines and/unlimited prison time for the offences of losing, misusing or failing to control access to the data.
Needs to be for the bosses and ministers too though. If the top people are at risk then they sore as hell will need to be on top of it and not just rest easy in throwing the little people under the bus.
If you want to be Home Sec or highly paid Civil Servant in charge and receive the pay, prestige, gongs then there has to be a “pain” if you haven’t ensured your organisation isn’t working properly.
Zelensky says that a Patriot system from Israel has been in Ukraine for a month, with two more expected later this year. Israel must be very confident that neither Iran, Hezbollah or Hamas will be in a position to launch an attack of any scale against them for some considerable time.
Israel has been upgrading from Patriot - to David's Sling and Iron Dome - so they are surplus to requirement.
Iron Dome is very short range interceptors.
Patriot is semi-strategic in reach and has some capability against MRBMs
If people start suggesting UK ID cards will be used for social credits as in China then I’m calling it hysterical nonsense . I get some people don’t like ID cards but really the arguments against aren’t strengthened by these examples with China .
The point being that the social credit system in China cannot work without digital ID.
No we are not now going to start doing that sort of thing. Probably not even under a more right wing Government like Reform. But do you really think that we will always have the luxury of Governments that are either so incompetant or benign that they won't think about imposing restrictions.
As others have aready mentioned, look at what happened during Covid lockdowns. How much easier would it have been for the authorities (and more dangerous for the public) if we had all been forced to carry digital ID at that point?
Mission creep and the abuse of power is a real thing in the British State. As I said yesterday just look at the abuses of the RIPA law under Blair and Brown - and continuing even to today. Despite the law supposedly being for the protection of National Security and serious crimes like People trafficing, local councils used RIPA laws 8,500 times last year to allow for covert surveillance.
As much as people moan about the Lords I’m sure they’ll do their job . And they certainly don’t have to be accommodating to the government given it wasn’t in the Labour manifesto at the GE .
Comments
"Mr Farage has now hit back, telling The Telegraph that the Prime Minister’s comments “bordered on the inciteful”."
Did they mishear, or misspell? Insightful?
Not that culture is static, as shown by the flag wavers lining up for curry and pizza at food stalls after the march.
I also find the intolerance of minority cultures by the "fun with flags" brigade as much of a threat as the intolerance of the more extreme strands of Islam, Hinduism and Christianity. Accepting that neighbours live differently and not attempting to force them into line, is the sort of British culture that I am proud of.
Organised religions have a lot wrong with them. Most of their adherents come nowhere near living up to their ideals. We know this.
However, weak tea 'wouldn't it be good if everyone tried being nicer to each other' has definite advantages over what tends to fill its space. It's very hard, for example, to reconcile the actions of the current manifestation of Christian Nationalism with the recorded attitudes of Christ.
The issue was that there was a minibudget increasing gilt sales and the OBR was sidelined and there was a limitless energy bailout increasing gilt sales and the Bank of England switching from Quantitative Easing to Quantitive Tightening for the first time ever increasing gilt sales.
Any one by itself might be fine, all of those happening together within 24 hours of each other . . . the result was inevitable.
It's a terrible shame that he was also lazy and casually dishonest.
Don't give me that near and far superstitious nonsense.
There are a smallish number of people who actually are holier than thou. The curious thing being that they don't bang on about it, because they don't want to. Discomforting to be around, but in a good way.
Amorim already giving another good push to be chopped.
Challenging Starmer as PM or opening a new food pantry in Cosham.
So I'm thinking I might give it up again, annoyingly I now need it for home use because I gave up the land line at my last braodband contract renewal. Perhaps I'll get a brick, and leave it at home.
The Mafia have never blown up a nuclear power plant in Ukraine.
Unlike the Russian government…
As you say, I don't have any calls using an actual phone number anymore, that's quite ancient and outdated technology.
I like my phone for my personal use, but I never really need it for work - except for a few seconds in limited instances where I use it as 2 factor authentication.
Holiness is a bit like 'suitability to run a government'; the more you say you have it, the more that you show that you haven't begun to understand the concept.
Talking of which, we may have a new Archbishop of Canterbury this week. Now there's a job where wanting the role ought to disqualify you.
That neither Boris not the Conservative party generally put in any safeguards against that laziness and casual dishonesty was disastrously reckless of them.
But thinking about it the one thing I would actually want to retain is Strava.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/sep/27/will-the-eu-new-fingerprint-entry-system-cause-gridlock-the-guardian-tried-it-out
Like most people
Not surprised to hear he has joined Reform. The natural home for self-regarding egotists who are not held in high regard by anyone else.
No wonder some lawyers have suggested that there are rights that they (the lawyers) can define, but parliament can’t touch.
Unless of course all the people signing the petition are going to refuse to go to Schengen countries anymore.
The ultra prot tradition, now quite common even amomg Anglicans, regards the bread and wine as little more than visual aids to devotion, so all communion is of a spiritual nature anyway.
The Book of Common Prayer of 1662 (still doctrinally the CoE yardstick) commends spiritual communion where necessary and useful and says so explicitly in the communion of the sick service.
The RC service of benediction, still quite common, is an entirely spiritual communion, in the presence of but not receiving the sacrament.
And lots of good people spiritually commune in the garden, golf course and pub. The omnicompetent God is a flexible god, and the Christian belief that God loves them all equally is not a bad approach.
But, I agree he was a somewhat self-centred candidate who thought being Lembit would be enough to win by itself.
I get a vote on our own country, and would oppose by principle my own country taking my ID and finger prints etc without due cause.
Visiting a foreign country is a privilege, not a right, and I don't have a vote on foreign countries' legislation.
It is entirely consistent to respect foreign countries laws when travelling there, while voting for your own country to set laws as you want them to be.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cn0xyqj7pxwo
On the subject of Art I liked this article and what the artist is doing, also like his paintings regardless of any meaning.
https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2025/sep/22/kerry-james-marshall-royal-academy-black-enslavers-america
If necessary I will comply with each of them to achieve my personal objectives but I'll still oppose them.
This is not inconsistent or hypocritical.
"Rupert Lowe MP
@RupertLowe10
British people don’t ask for much, really. A chance to raise a family in a safe town, with a good job and an opportunity to build a bit of security for the future. A place for their children at a solid school, the odd GP appointment when they need one and a police force that will actually turn up if there is ever trouble.
In short - we just want to get on with our lives in peace, with as little interference from the state as possible.
That really isn’t too much to ask, is it?
Please just leave us alone. That’s the British way. I like it like that.
Instead, we are being dragged into a world where the Government wants to track, log, and verify every aspect of our existence. I don’t want that. The British people don’t want that. We certainly didn't vote for it.
Let’s be clear. This has got absolutely sod all to do with illegal immigration.
I’m not even going to discuss that.
It’s about control. That’s it. The slow creep of a surveillance state that says you cannot live, work, or travel without proving yourself to the system first.
It happened once, during COVID. It was a disaster, as many of us said at the time.
Putting aside the morality behind the scheme, the Government will NOT be able to do it. These people are incompetent, the state is incompetent, it is all incompetent.
Do you trust them to effectively run such a scheme? Without leaks, breaches and cyber attacks?
It will be an unrelenting shitshow - I promise you that.
And what? We don’t have anything else to be focusing on? The country is such a utopia that vast amounts of Government time, energy and resource will now be spent fighting to implement this scheme? Really?
When it is introduced, it will grow and grow. We will never get rid of it.
We must draw a line in the sand, now. Sign the petition, write to your MP, make your voice heard. It does matter.
As an MP, I will do everything in my power to fight this - in Parliament and through Restore Britain, where plans are already underway to expose and fight the plans."
https://x.com/RupertLowe10/status/1971816994316984476
That, in a nutshell, is why Labour and the Tories are going to get smashed at the next election unless Reform does something incredibly toxic in the meantime.
For example -
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukla/Vict/20-21/155/contents/enacted
Hint I think a big reason for having an ID card is protecting you from Reform’s plans.
It's far from hysterical to believe it would be better to make sure the government is never in that position, that the tools for a social credit system are denied to them.
I suggest we have a piLot scheme. Anyone working for the govt needs a BritCard.
If after 25 years there have been no data leaks, nothing untoward happen, expand it to NHS workers.
Then in about 50 years time, maybe see how it has worked?
Depends if he has any budget to play with.
I was very sad to see him leave Forest. The change doesn't seem to have done us that much good.
I won't ever get a BritCard, or whatever it is called. I suspect this won't inconvenience me much, being self employed, and because I'm pretty sure millions of others wont comply...
The success of Israel against literally all its regional foes and the catastrophic failure of the Russian summer offensive must play a part. But it feels as if something more significant is at play. Behind the scenes security guarantees for both? Threats of secondary sanctions?
No we are not now going to start doing that sort of thing. Probably not even under a more right wing Government like Reform. But do you really think that we will always have the luxury of Governments that are either so incompetant or benign that they won't think about imposing restrictions.
As others have aready mentioned, look at what happened during Covid lockdowns. How much easier would it have been for the authorities (and more dangerous for the public) if we had all been forced to carry digital ID at that point?
Mission creep and the abuse of power is a real thing in the British State. As I said yesterday just look at the abuses of the RIPA law under Blair and Brown - and continuing even to today. Despite the law supposedly being for the protection of National Security and serious crimes like People trafficing, local councils used RIPA laws 8,500 times last year to allow for covert surveillance.
I don't.
And the new right (Reform, Loweists, UKIP, Restore Britain, Lozza Fox, flag raisers, 'extreme', 'far', Robinsonists etc) show no sign whatsoever of being, in reality, these sorts of people.
BTW, the single greatest objection to ID is the real doubt there is over government's competence to run it without endangering the public.
https://wunderhead.com/veneto-italy-summer-padua-vicenza-venice/
1) protecting data
2) controlling access to data
3) rights to have only accurate and relevant data stored
4) segmented and audited access to data - access is only available to relevant data, and audited. So, sorry, your local council can’t access to your NHS records when looking for flytippers.
5) right to be forgotten
I work with personal data - these rules are sensible, modern and fundamentally *decent*
The fact that the Home Office has previously tried, in connection with ID cards, to demand an exemption from such laws demonstrates something - their stupidly and incompetence. They are unfit to be allowed control of personal data, as it is.
In practice, I expect them to be so clueless that the Civil Service will run rings round them. We will get what senior civil servants want.
Unlimited personal fines and/unlimited prison time for the offences of losing, misusing or failing to control access to the data.
So a list, for the entire country, of who is and isn’t a foreigner. And where they live. And their religion.
Can’t see any problem with Reform having that.
No sir.
If you want to be Home Sec or highly paid Civil Servant in charge and receive the pay, prestige, gongs then there has to be a “pain” if you haven’t ensured your organisation isn’t working properly.
Patriot is semi-strategic in reach and has some capability against MRBMs