Identity Cards - More Information

NO2ID launches £1,000,000 pledge

At Least 10,000 people will refuse an ID Card.

Reckless ID card plan will destroy nation's freedom

Blunkett puts war before concerns for human rights

Midlothian SNP Slam Labour Authoritarianism (Press Release)

Freedom: the one thing our enemies want to destroy

Scots ID card plan gets green light

Blunkett retreats in battle over ID cards (temporarily)

Move towards compulsory ID cards

SNP's Cunningham slams Labour plan to bring in identity cards by back door

"Eyes of Scotland Blunkett" say SNP

BigBrother.Gov.uk - State Information In the age of information and rights

Labour Government using Terrorism as excuse for ID cards

NO2ID launches £1,000,000 pledge

Last week NO2ID's Refuse pledge was signed by over 10,000 people who will refuse to submit themselves to the proposed National Identity Register, after only one month. That number is still rising - past 10,500 - and the pledge will remain open until October (click the banner above). Every UK citizen that refuses to cooperate with the proposed identity system is a further thorn in the side of a project that is already too expensive, dangerous, unwieldy and unpopular.

This week NO2ID has launched a second pledge, at www.pledgebank.com/resist, which seeks 50,000 people to pledge £20, generating a £1,000,000 legal fighting fund to support those that choose to refuse. The pledge was launched by Franky Ma, a young mother living in London, who said:

"As the mother of a young child I can't risk her rights with mine by contesting ID cards directly, but I want to do everything I can to make sure she grows up in a free country."

The pledge is open until 31st March next year, and seeks support from those who for personal or professional reasons cannot risk falling outside the system by refusing to be registered into the national database.

NO2ID General Secretary, Guy Herbert said:

"The British public will not stand for the pointless bullying bureaucracy of a National Identity Register. It is unworkable. The 10,000 are merely the first cohort of those who will fail to comply. By pledging support now people can forestall this insanely wasteful scheme.

"The Home Office thinks it has Franky and millions like her over a barrel. The prospect of massive penalties, being forbidden to travel, and being locked out of a livelihood or public services, for just not wanting to have this government license to live, means refusal for her is not an option. But her support will let others sustain the fight."

The government should choose to save us, themselves and the public purse a huge amount of trouble by dropping the Identity Cards Bill now, before it inevitably unravels at the cost of tens of billions.

http://www.no2id.net

Index

Index

Reckless ID card plan will destroy nation's freedom

By Simon Davies

(Filed: 29/09/2001)

THE Government has embarked on its most reckless policy to date in pursuing the idea of national identity cards. The initiative will fundamentally change the nature of government and the character of the nation.

This is inevitable because the modern ID card is no simple piece of plastic. It is the visible component of a web of interactive technology that fuses the most intimate characteristics of the individual with the machinery of state.

It is the means by which the powers of government will be streamlined and amplified. Almost every national ID card system introduced in the past 15 years has contained three components with the potential to devastate personal freedom and privacy.

First, each citizen is obliged to surrender a finger or retina print to a national database. This information is combined with other personal data such as race, age and residential status. A photograph completes the dossier.

In addition, its introduction must be accompanied by a substantial increase in police power. After all, authorities will want to be able to demand the card in a wide range of circumstances, and people must be compelled to comply.

The most significant, yet most subtle, element is that the card and its numbering system will permit the linking of information between all government departments. The number is ultimately the most powerful element of the system.

Such a system, linked through tens of thousand of card readers to a central database, is the conventional means of dealing with the problem of counterfeit cards.

But the technology gap between governments and organised crime has narrowed so much that even the most highly secure cards are available as blanks, weeks after their official introduction. Criminals and terrorists can move more freely and more safely with several fake identities than they ever could in a country with multiple forms of ID.

To make sure people are who they claim to be, the new generation of cards, such as those introduced this year in Malaysia, incorporate a chip containing the "biometric" - a fingerprint, retina or hand scan of the holder. The card and the finger are placed into a reader, and the person is "validated".

Authorities can gain further personal information stored on the chip to confirm the holder's identity. This validation process can be done anywhere - on the streets, in airports, schools, banks, swimming pools or office buildings.

You will not hear any government emphasising these aspects. Instead, the new ID systems are benignly promoted as "citizen cards" that guarantee entitlement to benefits and services.

Five years ago, the Government quietly buried proposals for ID cards when it discovered that they would cost billions of pounds more than expected, would do little to prevent crime, and might become wildly unpopular.

How much more unpopular will they be when people learn that a scan of their body parts will be required?

If an ID card was unworkable five years ago, why would it work now? The short answer is that it would not - unless the biometric were added and the whole system verified through a national database. That is not a card: it is a national surveillance infrastructure.

If such a scheme is introduced in the current climate, three outcomes are inevitable. First, a high-security card will become an internal passport, demanded in limitless situations. (Don't leave home without it.)

Second, millions of people will be severely inconvenienced each year through lost, stolen or damaged cards, or through failure of computer systems or the biometric reading machinery.

Finally, the cards will inevitably be abused by officials who will use them as a mechanism for prejudice, discrimination or harassment.

No one has been able to identify any country where cards have deterred terrorists. To achieve this, a government would require measures unthinkable in a free society.

The Government thus faces a choice. Either it introduces a high-security biometric card that will challenge every tenet of freedom, or it introduces a low-security card that will soon be available to criminals and terrorists on the black market.

Or, of course, it can scrap the whole idea and concentrate on more proven measures to deal with terrorism.

Simon Davies is visiting fellow in the department of information systems at the London School of Economics and director of the watchdog group Privacy International

Index

ID cards 'would not stop the terrorists'

By Benedict Brogan, Political Correspondent

(Filed: 26/09/2001)

COMPULSORY identity cards would have done nothing to prevent the terror attacks on New York and Washington, and could leave ethnic minorities facing revived "sus laws", Charles Kennedy warned yesterday.

The Liberal Democrat leader said his party would oppose attempts to impose identity documents, but said he did not believe Tony Blair would introduce them.

Speaking to students in Bournemouth, Mr Kennedy said he had "two levels" of objections to the cards  - moral and practical. He believed it could allow people from ethnic minorities to be singled out by the police in a return of the "sus laws", the stop-and-search powers that opponents claimed were used predominantly against blacks.

He added: "If Britain or America had ID cards it would not have done anything to stop what the head-cases did."

He said terrorists who could forge passports would have no difficulty faking ID cards.

Mr Kennedy, who spoke to the Prime Minister yesterday, said Mr Blair was unlikely to legislate for ID cards, despite reports that the Home Office was considering plans to introduce them.

"The strong impression I got is that this is not a route we are going to go down," he said.

Alarm over ID cards

By George Jones

(Filed: 25/09/2001)

SENIOR Liberal Democrats expressed concern yesterday over the Government's decision to consider introducing compulsory identity cards as part of efforts to combat terrorism.

Charles Kennedy and other leading figures stressed the Liberal Democrats' role as a defender of civil liberties. Others questioned whether identity cards would have prevented the attacks in America.

In an emergency address to the conference, Mr Kennedy said that any new safeguards must not cut across fundamental civil liberties. He said that the principles of democracy were what the party was "all about".

"One of our particular duties is to make it clear that short-term, knee-jerk responses, never provide long-term solutions," he said.

Menzies Campbell, the party's foreign affairs spokesman, said he would need a "great deal of persuasion" before he would accept the necessity for compulsory ID cards.

Blunkett puts war before concerns for human rights

By Benedict Brogan, Political Correspondent

(Filed: 24/09/2001)

TONY BLAIR is prepared to amend the Human Rights Act if it stands in the way of new anti-terror legislation to help protect Britain from attack, the Home Secretary confirmed yesterday.

David Blunkett said it might be necessary to change the law to ensure that elected politicians were not prevented by civil rights considerations from defending those who elected them.

The Home Office is examining the possibility of introducing compulsory identity cards, Mr Blunkett said, as well as other measures designed to strengthen the Government's hand against the terror networks responsible for the attacks in the United States.

But Mr Blunkett said he would not act in haste, and rejected suggestions that Parliament could be recalled as early as this week to rush legislation through.

The Prime Minister is expected to seek the support of Iain Duncan Smith, the Tory leader, and Charles Kennedy, his Liberal Democrat counterpart, for measures such as new police powers to interrogate suspects and the abolition of some rights of judicial appeal for immigrants refused entry at British ports.

This could include allowing the arrest, solely for interrogation, of those who may have knowledge of terrorist activities. This would contravene the Human Rights Act.

Mr Blunkett's admission that the Act may be an obstacle to the Government is the first confirmation from a senior minister that the European Convention on Human Rights, on which it is based and which was incorporated into British law in Mr Blair's first term, is causing problems.

Mr Blunkett said the Government would have to find "an accommodation" with the Human Rights Act in order to prevent terrorists from "doing away with the most basic freedoms of all, the freedom from insecurity, from fear and of course from taking of life".

Simon Hughes, the Lib Dem home affairs spokesman, said it would be a "nonsense" to legislate again months after two major anti-terrorism Bills were passed.

But Mr Blunkett said he would challenge "anyone who dared to suggest" new measures were not needed.

Index

Freedom: the one thing our enemies want to destroy
(Filed: 21/09/2001)

John Wadham, the director of Liberty, argues against restriction of human rights

THERE is a danger that in the face of the appalling events in America, human rights and civil liberties will be seen as luxuries we cannot afford. Moving in that direction would be a further victory for those who murdered those thousands of innocent people and who demonstrated complete disregard for one of our most important rights - the right to life.

One of the most important things about living in Britain is our democracy, our civil liberties and human rights.

If we fail to preserve these values, if we lose our freedoms, then our fight with those who want to destroy us begins to lose its meaning. That is why the Government's proposals to the European Union Home Affairs Council in Brussels are of great concern. Any "harmonisation" needs to be viewed with great suspicion because it is likely further to erode our civil liberties.

One of the proposals is the creation of a "European arrest warrant". What that could mean in practice is that a British police officer will arrive at your door with, for instance, an Italian police officer in tow, to arrest you. They will take you via an impotent British court on to Italy where you will be dumped in a prison to await trial there, perhaps for something somebody thinks you did when you were on holiday.

The important tradition of habeas corpus and the crucial role of our courts in preventing abusive prosecutions and extradition on the basis of flimsy evidence to countries with less regard to the right to a fair trial will have disappeared.

There is also a suggestion that the protection that exists to prevent a British citizen being extradited to another country to face a charge there which is not also a criminal offence here should be abolished. Such protections are all too easily characterised as obstacles but it cannot be right that a person from this country should have to face a trial for something our Parliament has not made criminal.

The safeguards and protections on surveillance in this country are inadequate and the proposal to give Europol powers to invade our privacy and listen to our personal communications would be a very serious step. We all want the authorities to be able to collect information on anyone involved in attempts to murder and maim. But in order to find anything useful, systems of surveillance have a tendency to collect up masses of material on innocent people. We need safeguards, such as prior authorisation from a court, to ensure that surveillance is as narrowly focused as possible, that mistakes about the target and the collection of irrelevant material are dealt with immediately.

Another EU proposal is to have Europe-wide powers to ban organisations.

Here, membership (even professed membership) of a "proscribed" organisation is a criminal offence. You can be imprisoned for up to 10 years for any action taken for the "benefit" of a banned group. You will commit this offence by organising a meeting, which is attended by someone from a banned group, even if you publicly denounce the group's aims. It is also an offence to wear or display anything, such as a T-shirt, badge or banner, which might arouse suspicion that you support a proscribed group.

Guilt by association cannot be in the interests of justice and allowing the EU to decide which organisations to ban creates additional dangers.

The demand for identity cards is equally suspect. To ensure that the police could track a person's whereabouts, we would all have to be obliged to carry cards and to produce them whenever demanded by the police and other authorities and bureaucrats. Random checks would have to become routine and regular to have any chance of finding a person without one. This was the position here 50 years ago but, thank goodness, Winston Churchill's government abolished the cards and did so because they were demanded on a routine basis and the power to do so was regularly abused.

ID cards do not tell the police who is about to commit a suicide bombing. Terrorists already use those who are not known or suspected by the police to carry out their work.

Any claim made by this Government that giving police (particularly the Europolice) more powers or taking away the rights of us, the citizens, will provide greater protection must be very carefully scrutinised. None of the proposals suggested by the EU would have stopped the terrorists in America.

In protecting ourselves from terrorist attack, we must not lose sight of the fact that tolerance, democracy and human rights are the very core values that make our society so precious.

Index

Blunkett retreats in battle over ID cards
By Benedict Brogan, Political Correspondent
(Filed: 02/10/2001)

THE Government will not include compulsory identity cards in its package of emergency legislation to combat terrorism, David Blunkett conceded yesterday.

The Home Secretary led a concerted effort by ministers to calm fears among civil liberty groups and Labour MPs that Britain's reaction to the attacks on the United States would mean a move towards mandatory ID cards.

Mr Blunkett said he was not prepared to rush a decision on the issue, and suggested public consultation would be necessary before such a step could be taken.

Civil liberty groups welcomed what they described as a climbdown in the face of mounting opposition.

Speaking at a conference fringe meeting organised by the think tank Demos and The Telegraph, Mr Blunkett said his failure to rule out the option soon after September 11 had been to blame, in part, for media speculation that identity cards would be introduced.

However, civil liberty campaigners accused the Home Office and Downing Street of deliberately floating the idea to test public reaction.

"It's not my intention to deal with this issue this week at conference," Mr Blunkett said.

"It's not our intention to rush something through. The first emergency measure which will deal with the question of tackling terrorism head on will not include legislation on ID and entitlement cards.

"We have not yet come to any conclusions on whether we should have a debate about this. We haven't made a decision yet. We are interested in thinking about it. If thinking about it means we intend on going ahead with it, then we are not."

He said he did not want to raise the issue in the context of the attack on the World Trade Centre. He raised the plight of "hundreds of thousands" of people who are in the country illegally and victims of exploitation.

"We are trying to work out how to legitimise their presence and entitlements and whether it is worth having an entitlement card in those circumstances," he said.

However, a spokesman for Liberty said: "There is no question that this was floated by the Home Office and the Prime Minister in the context of anti-terrorism measures and that's been very misleading.

"We are very pleased that they have apparently retreated but the Home Office do still seem to be saying that ID cards are on the agenda in some form. So the coalition that's assembled to oppose them needs still to be vigilant."

Mr Blunkett was backed by his deputy at the Home Office, Lord Rooker, who told another fringe meeting there was "no secret Bill and no secret agenda". Downing Street said the whole issue was on the "slow track".

Index

The introduction of compulsory identity cards in Britain has moved a step closer with a plan for "entitlement cards". Home Secretary David Blunkett is asking for feedback on the cards, which holders would not be obliged to carry. It is suggested they would be used to clamp down on fraud by checking rights to receive NHS treatment, education and state benefits.

The computerised cards could store a photograph, finger prints and personal information including name and address. Although it would be compulsory to possess a card, Mr Blunkett stressed it would not be mandatory for holders to carry it.

BBC Political Editor Andrew Marr said legislation on the cards might be expected towards the end of this year or early in 2003. Civil Rights group Liberty told BBC News Online it would oppose the plans, which follow the introduction of identity cards for asylum seekers last week.

Many arguments

Outlining the scheme Mr Blunkett said: "We have made it clear that the introduction of an entitlement card would be a major step and that we will not proceed without consulting widely and considering all the views expressed very carefully.

"There are many arguments - both philosophical and practical - for and against a scheme."

Former Labour Home Office Minister Mike O'Brien argues introducing ID cards, which he believes could be easily forged, would cost £1bn.

ID cards for asylum seekers were introduced last week

Mr O'Brien believes the money would be better spent on policing.

He told BBC One's Ten O'Clock News: "The whole idea of ID cards at a cost of over £1bn is unwieldy and too expensive.

"There are better ways of reducing crime."

Home Affairs Minister Angela Eagle said the cards might worry some people but would offer advantages.

"It's important to be able to establish identity quickly.

"It may be very convenient if entitlement cards allow quicker access both to financial services in the private sector and state public services.

"The disadvantatages may be that people feel there's too much information around that they feel they are being watched."

Identity fraud

Mr Blunkett said the main use of the cards would be to demonstrate what entitlement people have to state services, not to identify them.

His spokesman said: "We're not interested in just having another form of ID because people already have a passport or driving licence."

It is thought the system could also make it easier for banks to cut down on identity fraud, such as credit card crime or bogus benefit claims.

David Blunkett has asked for feedback on the cards

But Liberty's campaigns director Mark Littlewood called on the government to look at alternative ways of tackling identity fraud.

Rejecting the idea that people would not be forced into carrying the cards, he said: "If it's going to be necessary to have one to access all types of service it is, for all intents and purposes, compulsory."

Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman Simon said the party also opposed the idea of identity cards which could become "show on demand".

But the spokesman insisted: "We're not going to have apartheid-style stop and search as part of this.

Early feedback hopes

"The government has already said that is not an option."

Although a consultation paper could be published by the government in the spring or summer, Mr Blunkett wants feedback before that.

The government hopes entitlement cards will pay for themselves, by cutting the cost of fraud.

It is thought they would be based on the Applicant Registration Cards (ARC), launched for all new asylum seekers last week.

Index

Scots ID card plan gets green light

JASON ALLARDYCE

SCOTS are to be issued with ID cards in a controversial move to tackle illegal immigration, terrorism, identity fraud and make it easier for citizens to access public services.

First Minister Jack McConnell is to place the plan at the heart of Labour’s Scottish Parliament election campaign, risking the wrath of civil liberties campaigners and his Liberal Democrat coalition partners who believe it breaches human rights.

According to Labour, the so-called "entitlement cards" would give people access to welfare benefits as well as allowing them to use buses, car parks, leisure centres and to borrow library books and pay rent. They could also contain medical information - such as blood types and allergies - and be used as a proof of age to tackle underage drinking.

But human rights campaigners are concerned they could be used by the police and other authorities to carry out identity checks and catch benefit cheats. The cards would have to be produced at police stations if requested.

Campaign groups including Liberty and Charter 88 say the entitlement cards would curtail civil liberties. They also doubt ID cards are effective against crime and terrorism, pointing to the ability of criminals to forge any form of identification.

However, rank and file police are backing the idea. The Scottish Police Federation says civil liberties must come second to national security in the light of the terrorist atrocities perpetrated on September 11, 2001, and since. In a new policy paper it states: "The world has become a more dangerous place and we all have a responsibility to do what we can to contribute towards greater public safety. If this means a diminution of personal privacy then that is something we must weigh against the benefits to society as a whole."

Under McConnell’s plans, citizens would not be forced to use the cards, nor carry them at all times. But they could be incorporated into driving licences which everyone requires to drive inside the country.

Those who do not drive would simply get a plastic card with a microchip embedded in it containing personal information that public service providers could access, for example to check entitlements before giving out benefits.

McConnell wants the cards to be introduced throughout the UK but ministers in England are deeply divided over the idea, which could lead to the cards being piloted first in Scotland.

The UK Home Secretary David Blunkett recently hinted that ID cards were likely to be introduced when he described figures showing a record increase in people seeking asylum in the country as "deeply unsatisfactory".

A senior Scottish Labour source said the cards would help tackle terrorism. He said: "No one is suggesting that anyone who fails to carry a card would be instantly locked up. You’re not suddenly going to see police getting lots of extra powers to stop and search and lift you off the street. This isn’t about the nanny state or big brother. But it would be very helpful if police have someone in custody who claims to be someone else and they can quickly prove what the truth is and what action should then be taken. It’s not a panacea but it is a useful tool."

The source said the cards could also help stamp out benefit fraud by enabling hit squads to conduct spot checks within companies where people in receipt of benefits may be working.

But the pressure group Liberty denounced the idea as a waste of money "so the government can snoop on innocent British citizens".

The UK information commissioner Richard Thomas has also warned of the danger of "function creep", whereby a card that starts off only carrying basic details such as the name, address, date of birth and national insurance number of its owner is later widened to include much more personal details including financial data, work record, race and religion. He is warning ministers to guard against a drift towards "a surveillance society".

A spokesman for Labour’s Scottish coalition partners, the Liberal Democrats, said the party is firmly opposed to the idea which it too sees as a breach of human rights. He added: "We don’t see any purpose for them and so far there has been no compelling case made for them."

Yesterday the Scottish National Party also vowed to resist the introduction of ID cards.

But the Scottish Police Federation said ID cards would not only assist in the fight against terrorism but also protect law-abiding citizens against fraud, theft by bogus workmen and other crimes committed by people pretending to be someone they are not.

A spokesman said: "ID cards would make the job of the police easier. They would reduce the time taken in confirming identities and, in turn, reduce the time spent by individuals in detention waiting for this to be done."

From Scotland on Sunday - 24th March 2003

Index

SNP's Cunningham slams Labour plan to bring in identity cards by back door

Shadow Justice Minister Roseanna Cunningham MSP today said Labour were attempting to introduce identity cards by the back door after it was revealed that they planned to issue "entitlement cards" to all Scots.

"Labour can call these cards 'entitlement cards' or anything else they like, but people will recognise them for what they are - identity cards," said Ms Cunningham.

"The very fact that they are not willing to call a spade a spade and admit they are ID cards, shows that they know that people do not want these cards and don't believe they are necessary. It is incredible to suggest that criminals, or even terrorists, will be put off by the need to obtain an ID card."

"Their only impact will be to infringe the rights of ordinary law abiding citizens." Slamming Labour she said, "Labour has abandoned traditional Scottish values and nothing shows this better than their Big Brother mentality. They are a party that has lost touch, been in power too long and become arrogant. It is time to get rid of them."

Index

Midlothian SNP Press Release

 

START

"Eyes of Scotland Blunkett" say SNP

 

UK Ministers have announced a radical scaling down of plans to give state agencies powers to access telephone, internet and email records. The plans were condemned as a "snooper's charter" last June, and the home secretary, David Blunkett, has been pressured into reducing their severity. However Midlothian SNP Press Officer Joe Middleton believes the new powers suggested still go too far and says the UK Government "are still trying to use the threat of terrorism as an excuse to launch unparalleled powers of surveillance".

UK officials had planned to allow a vast range of public bodies - including seven Whitehall departments, local councils and 11 quangos - the right to demand access to private communications records.  Such powers had previously been the domain only of the police, MI5, MI6, government listening-post GCHQ, customs and excise and the inland revenue.

The Home Office have now revealed a shorter list, which the public have been asked to comment on before it is approved. They are the UK atomic energy constabulary, the Scottish drugs enforcement agency and the maritime and coastguard agency. Fire authorities and NHS trusts will also get full access to investigate suspicious fires or hoax 999 calls.
 

A second list of organisations will have powers to access data about phone and internet subscribers, such as names and addresses. This will include all 468 local councils in the UK, five government departments, the Environment Agency, the Royal Mail, Food Standards Agency and the Office of Fair Trading.

 

Phone companies should keep records for 12 months on date and time of calls, duration, numbers dialled, and - in the case of mobiles - the location of the user. Other information, such as on text messages would be kept for six months, as should records on email logons, plus sent and received email. Web activity - such as the URL of web sites visited - would be kept for four days. 
 

Midlothian SNP Press Officer Joe Middleton told the Advertiser "The Government are still trying to use the threat of terrorism as an excuse to launch unparalleled powers of surveillance. The SNP obviously welcome the fact that Mr Blunkett has scaled down his initial proposals however we still feel this is the 'thin end of the wedge' and there are no genuine reasons for increases in surveillance powers whatsoever."

 

"To give an example, powers are being given to snoop on telephone calls to supposedly stop fake 999 calls, however a fake 999 call is most likely going to be made from a public call box, not a home address!"

 

"The SNP have a simple message for the Home Office - Eyes of Scotland Blunkett, this  Snoopers Charter is still unacceptable."

 

Civil rights groups are also unconvinced by the UK Government's new proposals. The director of civil rights group Liberty, John Wadham has said "The original snooper's charter proposals were appallingly excessive. We welcome much of the government plan to step back from them. But authorities accessing this data should need a warrant from a judge - that's the only truly independent safeguard that can produce public confidence."

 

He added "It remains a little unclear why, for example, NHS trusts need access to this information - surely the health service should be concentrating all its resources on providing healthcare, with police investigating crime."

 

END

www.midlothiansnp.org

Index

More information ie the paper 'BigBrother.Gov.uk - State Information In the age of information and rights' is available by clicking on the following link:

http://www.cyber-rights.org/documents/crimlr.pdf

Index

How to Campaign against these proposals

 

1) Write a personal letter to your local MP or email them full details are available from the Westminster Parliament Site

 

2) If in Scotland write to your local MSP or email them from here Contact the Welsh Assembly here

 

3) Write to or email the individual political parties (SNP, Plaid Cymru, SSP, Labour, Tories, Lib-Dems, Greens ) to make clear your opposition to the scheme and make it known you want these plans stopped.

4) Write to or email the local and national papers you can do this by clicking on the links below :

The Evening News, The Scotsman, The Herald, Scotland on Sunday, The Sun, The Daily Record, The Scots Independent, The Sunday Mail, Press & Journal, The Dundee Courier,  Evening Times, Evening Telegraph, The Evening Telegraph,  The Times, The Daily Telegraph, The Financial Times, The Independent, The Guardian, The Daily Mail, The Metro, The Mirror  The Sunday Post, The Sunday Herald, The Sunday Times, Sunday Business,  Sunday Telegraph, The Observer Scottish Sunday Express, The Mail on Sunday, The Sunday Mirror, News of the World, Sunday People or email them all at once by clicking here.

Please remember to add your full name and address and a day time phone number. Also paste all addresses (if emailing more than one paper) into the Blind Copy (BCC) box (not the default) as papers like to feel they have been written to individually)

ID Card Letters

 

5) Join or contact the Liberty organisation who are currently campaigning against these proposals or for more general world wide human right issues Amnesty International

 

Index

 

Labour Government using Terrorism as excuse for ID cards

 

Alistair Darling (MP for Edinburgh Central)

Dear Mr Darling,

You will recall that I wrote to you on a number of occasions expressing my concerns re ID cards.

In a response dated 22/08/2003

You enclosed a letter from Beverley Hughes Home Office Minister dated 12/08/2003 which stated:

"The Government has made clear that it does not consider that an entitlement card scheme would have a significant effect in combating terrorism in the United Kingdom."

"In the debate on whether or not to have a card scheme the issues of citizenship, entitlement to services and combating illegal immigration illegal working and identity fraud are more important."

"Finally, the Government has already ruled out a scheme where it would be compulsory to carry a card and will not be consulting on this option."

Given this response, I am very concerned that Tony Blair seems to be now using terrorism as an excuse to bring in ID cards only a few months after ruling it out!

Also, despite a compulsory scheme supposedly being 'ruled out' and 'not being consulted upon' I now read in the press that according to his plans published yesterday such a scheme is to be forced through in 2013!

A lot of fuss has been made about recent arrests under the PTA, however we still do not know whether any crime has actually been committed by these suspects.

I remain strongly opposed to ID cards and I am particularly concerned that Mr Blunkett seems desperate to railroad his plans through parliament on spurious grounds.

For democracy to work in practice, Government departments must provide accurate information to the public.

When someone receives an official letter from a Minister at the Home Office stating something as fact, they do not expect, a matter of a few months later to hear the exact opposite being declared as fact by the Home Secretary and the Prime Minister!

I look forward to your comments.

Yours sincerely,

Joe Middleton

Index