From Hansard comes this little gem by Lord Gould of Brookwood:
“Both the previous speakers—the latter with great emotion—were arguing for freedom. We have to ask what greater freedom is there than the freedom to place a vote for a political party in a ballot box upon the basis of a mandate and a manifesto. That is the crux of it: the people have supported this measure. That is what the noble Earl’s father fought for. But that is too trivial an answer. I know that. The fundamental argument is that the truth is that people believe that these identity cards will affirm their identity. The noble Lord opposite said that he likes to be in this House and how he is recognised in this House because it is a community that recognises him. That is how the people of this nation feel. They feel that they are part of communities, and they want recognition. For them, recognition comes in the form of this identity card. Noble Lords may think that that is strange, but it is what they feel. This is their kind of freedom. They want their good, hard work and determination to be recognised, rewarded and respected. That is what this does.
Of course it is right and honourable for noble Lords to have their views, but I say there is another view, and it is the view of the majority of this country. They want to have the respect, recognition and freedom that this card will give them. Times have changed. Politics have changed. What would not work 50 years ago, works now. It is not just me. I have the words of the leader of your party:
“I have listened to the police and security service chiefs. They have told me that ID cards can and will help their efforts to protect the lives of British citizens against terrorist acts. How can I disregard that?”.
This is not some silly idea of the phoney left. It is a mainstream idea of modern times. It is a new kind of identity and a new kind of freedom. I respect the noble Lords’ views, but it would help if they respected the fact that the Bill and the identity cards represent the future: a new kind of freedom and a new kind of identity. “
Lord Gould presumes that the electorate – all 22% of them – voted for the Labour Party manifesto; having read it, one presumes. The arrogance is staggering beyond belief. According to this peer, being shackled to the National Identity Register; having our lives an open book to the instruments and functionaries of the state is “freedom”. This is classic “Newspeak” at its worst. Also, the idea that the freedom to cast a vote is the greatest freedom there is, is deeply flawed. In our first-past-the-post system, most of us have votes that are meaningless. It is the floating voter in key marginals who holds the keys to Number 10 Downing Street. It is they, come election time, who are wooed by the parties seeking office. The rest of us can go hang – and do. Certainly our votes do not set us free. Be under no illusion, ours is not a free, liberal democracy; it is an elected dictatorship.
Democracy is not the be all and end all – the right to vote does not set us free. Democracy is simply two wolves and a sheep discussing dinner; to coin a metaphor. As Winston Churchill once put it; democracy is the least worst option. So, it needs checks and balances to protect us from its excesses. The current administration seeks to undermine these excesses. The ID cards Bill is perhaps, the most overt of these.
As far as recognition goes, I’m more than capable of recognising myself – I do not need the government to step in and help me affirm my identity. If I think people need to know who I am, I will give them such information as I deem necessary for us to conduct whatever transaction we have in mind. My identity belongs to me – not the state. I will affirm it as I see fit. A plastic card backed up by a stasi-like database is not how I plan to do it.
Freedom; for the benefit of Lord Gould, who seems not to understand the concept; is the right to go where I please, when I please without interference from the state. The right to be whoever I want; to reinvent myself should I please – without interference from the state. The right, should I so please; to be anonymous – without interference from the state. I am not chattel of the state – it exists to serve me.
Lord Gould went on to say:
“My understanding is that the public want more compulsion, not less, and they want this done quickly, not slowly. The noble Lord is out of step with the public. They want it done because they know the world is changing and that there is fraud, terror and identity theft. They want this done quickly and compulsion cannot come too quickly for them. The noble Lord is in the wrong place.”
Yes, possibly they do. That does not mean that they are right. Frequently, the majority – all 22% of them – are wrong. The majority would cheerfully hang murderers and worry not a jot that they had just executed innocent people on the basis of flawed evidence. Populism is not a reason for enacting policy.
Identity cards do not make us free; they reverse our relationship with the state. We become the slave, and the state the master. Now there’s a kind of freedom… Freedom is slavery. Where have I heard that before?
—–