Saturday, July 31, 2004
I've received a copy of the Home Office Select Committee's Report on ID Cards, presumerably due to my having made a written submission to them way back at the start of the year. Next time I find myself trapped in a parallel dimension with time to spare I'll be able to read the thing.
Anyway, media reaction has tended towards emphasising the negatives of the reports, mainly because if not sorted out they render the whole process an extremely expensive and pointless experience, costing the taxpayer loads and giving none of the benefits that Blunkett claims, although he's gone back on most of these already anyway.
The Register goes with A bad idea, but we'll do it anyway.
The National ID Card programme will be too expensive, has been shrouded in secrecy and lacks sufficient safeguards against abuse. So says a report from the Home Affairs Select Committee, which describes the Home Secretary David Blunkett's secretive approach as "regrettable"... However, in apparent defiance of its own findings, the report broadly supports the introduction of a national identity register and identity card. The general sentiment is that ID cards are OK, but the government must proceed with caution.
The BBC say Plans for introducing ID cards in the UK are poorly thought out and vital details are still unclear, say MPs. They report the committee's concern that too many of the decisions relating to ID Cards are made in private with no public oversight and call for the process to be made open and transparent. Shiteyes reaction? The political equivelent of "Fuck off!"
But Home Secretary David Blunkett said the desire for more information had to be balanced against getting best value by keeping market-sensitive details of contracts confidential.
The Independent go further with Home Secretary David Blunkett is refusing to publish full details of finances behind the controversial national identity scheme, despite recommendations today from an influential committee of MPs.
Precious little support either from the Telegraph, MPs scathing over plans for national ID cards (login required), while The Times gives the matter the briefest of mentions.
It's also worth having a look at what STAND and Liberty (in evil, evil pdf form) have to say on the subject.
Putting aside my feelings on both the worthlessness of the cards and the pointlessness of pissing on Shiteyes if he were on fire what concerns me most is the massive secrecy Blunkett is shrouding the whole affair in, rejecting all calls to open his plans to scrutiny. It's as if the stakes are so high now that, despite there being no credible argument for these cards helping in the problems we face with security today, Blunkett can't back down on ID cards without destroying his parliamentary career, so like Gollum he has to hide away from the sunlight of public scrutiny while muttering darkly about his 'precious'.
Anyway, media reaction has tended towards emphasising the negatives of the reports, mainly because if not sorted out they render the whole process an extremely expensive and pointless experience, costing the taxpayer loads and giving none of the benefits that Blunkett claims, although he's gone back on most of these already anyway.
The Register goes with A bad idea, but we'll do it anyway.
The National ID Card programme will be too expensive, has been shrouded in secrecy and lacks sufficient safeguards against abuse. So says a report from the Home Affairs Select Committee, which describes the Home Secretary David Blunkett's secretive approach as "regrettable"... However, in apparent defiance of its own findings, the report broadly supports the introduction of a national identity register and identity card. The general sentiment is that ID cards are OK, but the government must proceed with caution.
The BBC say Plans for introducing ID cards in the UK are poorly thought out and vital details are still unclear, say MPs. They report the committee's concern that too many of the decisions relating to ID Cards are made in private with no public oversight and call for the process to be made open and transparent. Shiteyes reaction? The political equivelent of "Fuck off!"
But Home Secretary David Blunkett said the desire for more information had to be balanced against getting best value by keeping market-sensitive details of contracts confidential.
The Independent go further with Home Secretary David Blunkett is refusing to publish full details of finances behind the controversial national identity scheme, despite recommendations today from an influential committee of MPs.
Precious little support either from the Telegraph, MPs scathing over plans for national ID cards (login required), while The Times gives the matter the briefest of mentions.
It's also worth having a look at what STAND and Liberty (in evil, evil pdf form) have to say on the subject.
Putting aside my feelings on both the worthlessness of the cards and the pointlessness of pissing on Shiteyes if he were on fire what concerns me most is the massive secrecy Blunkett is shrouding the whole affair in, rejecting all calls to open his plans to scrutiny. It's as if the stakes are so high now that, despite there being no credible argument for these cards helping in the problems we face with security today, Blunkett can't back down on ID cards without destroying his parliamentary career, so like Gollum he has to hide away from the sunlight of public scrutiny while muttering darkly about his 'precious'.
