Slashdot Mirror
UK's Blair Dismisses Online Anti ID-Card Petition
An anonymous reader writes "Prime Minister Tony Blair has responded personally via email to 28,000 online petitioners opposing the UK's planned identity card scheme, and has closed the online petition. The email reads: 'We live in a world in which people, money and information are more mobile than ever before. Terrorists and international criminal gangs increasingly exploit this to move undetected across borders and to disappear within countries. Terrorists routinely use multiple identities — up to 50 at a time... ID cards which contain biometric recognition details and which are linked to a National Identity Register will make this much more difficult.'"
The anti-congestion charge one has racked up over 1.5 million signatures, and that too is going to be ignored.
:(
Last week I created a petition asking the government to actually pay notice to the petition service that *THEY* set up, and not just give it lip-service when it suits them... That petition request was rejected.
So much for democracy
Sig out of date
If terrorists justify everything, terrorists are an irresistible weapon for a dishonest government.
In Italy the communist BR have appeared in two occasions lately. Some years ago they killed two people, D'Antona and Biagi, the second one was working on a law on new type of flexible work contracts. Result, the Biagi bill gets passed with nobody daring to make a discussion. Same kind of laws in france wrecked the government caused unrest.
Ten days ago a police operation finds terrorists who were plotting against berlusconi et al. Media start talking about terrorism again and a national demonstration in Vicenza against the planned increase of american military presence in the nearby base, having a sizable percentage of leftists, becomes a terrorist threat.
People who started protesting because their city, Vicenza, is already too crowded first get commies using the occasion to burn flags, then they are looked upon the police as potential terrorists. Checkmate.
---- MISSING MISCELLANEOUS DATA SEGMENT --- [sigdash] trolololol
He's just doing the kiddie lie thing of telling a half truth. Of course such a system may/will make what he said harder for terrorist and the other boogey men - I don't doubt that in the same way that I don't doubt that if it is hard for me to breathe in a room due to lack of air a terrorist would also find it hard to breathe. If those things become difficult for everyone who isn't 100% "simon-says" follower then the terrorists will not be exempt.
However, and I may just be misguided and paranoid, I find myself a lot more afraid of a large governments with massive databanks, financial caches, and military assets powered by men trained to be unquestioning soldiers (for better or worse) that some pissed off and somewhat oprressed (some might say cursed) terrorist.
So yah I see much more potential for bad than potential for good - from what I hear we as Earthlings have a greater chance of Aophis destroying us than terrorist.
"Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
Ignoring a petition from 27thousand out of a population of 60million ish is hardly a big deal IMHO and says more about how little people understand the issue and care either way than it does about democracy in action.
If one were to look for a better example of democracy being stifled, it was the "sinister" road tolls petition - http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/traveltax/ with a total of 1.6 million people signed up. The original government response was more or less "who cares how many people sign it, it's still not going to make a difference to policy. I wonder how that one will end.
So my question is, why would you put this site up for people to raise petitions, if you don't plan to pay any attention to the petitions people put on it?
For the UK though, i'd resist such a system. The government has a long history of ignoring the desires of the public (which kind of undermines my understanding of democracy) and enacting laws under spurious premises. Basically, i don't trust them.
Because they are experts at spinning things like this. Look at Blair's reply, he quotes a survey which found that a majority were in favour of ID cards - he's saying "you got 27000, I've got 27000000".
The public don't help themselves on sites like this. Look at the number of frivolous petitions that get requested - all nicely displayed on the site to show they are listening, to everyone and no-one.
Notice also that the petition to bring back Fox Hunting currently has 30000 signatories. Puts the ID card petition in another bad light (IMO).
The only "petition" that matters to a politician is an election.
rt
Biometric ID, and the ID databases are all about having a stream of data about the various activities of people ('securely linked to each person, hence biometric) so that that data can be trawled for patterns that will reveal suspicious activity.
Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
As I have said, it is clear that if we want to travel abroad, we will soon have no choice but to have a biometric passport. We estimate that the cost of biometric passports will account for 70% of the cost of the combined passports/id cards. The additional cost of the ID cards is expected to be less than £30 or £3 a year for their 10-year lifespan.
h tml - although amusingly that's from a poll highly biased in favour of the Government's plans).
We already have biometric passports in the UK - and that has already given a hefty increase in the price.
As for his whinging that the price of an ID card is being conflated with the price of a passport, perhaps the Government should stop conflating the needs for a passport with the needs for a compulsory ID card and national database?
Oh, and even a £30 price for an ID card is above what most people would be willing to pay (see http://www.ipsos-mori.com/polls/2004/detica-top.s
New Labour (and especially Gordon Brown) have done an excellent job in taking credit for what was achieved by Major and Clarke. Every active thing which Brown has done (as opposed to just saying, "Carry on as you were") has been an unmitigated disaster. It's hard to conceive of a worse prime minister than Tony Blair, but Brown might just manage it. He's a total incompetent, with a ludicrously high opinion of himself.
You didn't vote for a Labour government though. ~35% of those who bothered voting (I don't vote by the way, I blow up police stations) voted for labour. ~32% voted for the Conservative and ~22% voted LibDem. In a decent electoral system, Labour would have received ~35% of the seats, they got ~55%. The Conservatives would have received ~32% of the seats, they got ~31%. The LibDems just under 10%.
You haven't got a democracy in the UK. You have First Past the Post. It doesn't matter who you vote for. Your vote won't get counted. Fuck that for a system.
I wank in the shower.
The art of repressive politics - overall - is keeping the level of abuse down to just under that point where the populace will turn on you. Both the UK and the USA have been riding ever closer to that line, yet artfully avoiding crossing it. Modern polling techniques added to modern disinformation techniques have produced a society that is passive in the face of massive levels of rights loss, coercion, and general interference; modern comforts leave citizens ever more unwilling to take the risk of sacrificing all for what to most of them is just an abstract.
As long as this balance in maintained, there are only two choices for the disaffected; push the rest of the populace over the line (which puts you in the same position as the government - the populace didn't want to go there in the first place so you are engaged in coercion) or act on your own if you can find an effective vector. This, of course, is extremely risky, as the natural corollary for the government's getting out of hand in the above-described ways is an increased level of activity against the disaffected.
Currently, the levers that crack open the door to dictatorship are labeled "terrorism" and "think of the children." These two factors, artfully applied, have demonstrated the power to make the UK and USA populations give up anything, put up with anything, pay anything, without upsetting anyone but the highest functioning individuals who have made rights and freedom their concern. And this is far too small a demographic to result in an effective counter reaction. Until or unless you can defuse the power of these two control vectors to manipulate the general population, and keep replacement and enhancement vectors from taking their place (oh god, we have to control carbon output) it is my opinion that the governments of both countries will continue to increase pressure on the populace in the areas of rights loss, coercion, and general interference. The benefits are power, as you noted, and financial gains for those who control the system. These are not elements that can be replaced for the power hungry; you can offer no substitute, you can only remove them, and that, of course, will provoke a severe reaction.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.