While out of the headlines for a while, the ID Cards Bill is trundling through the political process. The current stage is its reading in the Lords.
“The government is bracing itself for a possible double defeat over its controversial identity card plans.
Ministers are preparing for a series of votes in the House of Lords – which could see opposition peers uniting with Labour rebels to reject the ID card plan.
The government has been stung by claims that the new cards could cost as much as £500 to produce.
There are also fears that ID cards would not prove effective in combating terrorism or organised crime.”
Nothing new here – but it is nice to see the government getting a well deserved kicking.
It is likely that the peers will propose some amendments along with demands that the Home Office comes clean regarding costs.
Conservative and Liberal Democrat peers have joined forces in an attempt to extract from the government their exact projections of the costs of the identity cards scheme.
Oh ho… Now things are starting to get interesting – after all, this means that the noxious bastards will have to stop lying. That will be fascinating to observe. Is it possible, I wonder? Andy Burnham, the lickpittle lackey who clearly wasn’t quick enough to get out of the way when the briefs were being handed out to ministers, has managed to get his knickers in a knot as he stamps his foot at the unfairness of it all and scweams and scweams and scweams… Sorry, getting carried away, there Ahem:
The issue has already sparked a war of words between the government and the most senior independent experts on the issue, with home office minister Andy Burnham today accusing critics of “bouts of scaremongering” over the likely costs.
Bouts of scaremongering, indeed. This from the man who either cannot or will not come clean when asked a straight question on the matter. If credibility were gold, this man would be a pauper. His lack of knowledge and competence rivals that of Eddie the Eagle – although I probably do a disservice to Eddie. For the Home Office, this is a liability – for those of us opposed; it is some comfort to realise that these people have placed an incompetent buffoon in charge. Is it possible to take anything this man says seriously? I find it difficult.
According the the London School of Economics, the cost is set to rise to five times that originally quoted by the Home Office. Indeed, so unwilling are the Home office to discuss the matter that the LSE has decided to have nothing to do with it anymore. Their press release published on the NO2ID forum says this:
‘As this second report shows, the Government have not been very forthcoming in providing details of their proposals. The LSE team stands by the cost estimates outlined in its first report, but changes to the policy made by the Home Office make it difficult now to produce a definitive assessment of the total cost. Other government departments, if they wish to adopt the ID scheme, may opt in at a later date. Any estimates made of the cost of the current proposals may therefore significantly underestimate the total cost of the scheme in the longer term.’
The likely outcome from the Lords is that they will try to put the scheme on ice until the Home Office produces some costs. We could be in for a long wait then.
The other likely outcome is an amendment that I have already discussed; whereby the link between passport renewal and forcible registration is removed, making the scheme truly voluntary.
Should that happen, my opposition to the scheme will evaporate. If you wish to stump up £500 for registration and a piece of plastic that tells you what you already know, not only do you have money to burn (and can I borrow a fiver?) but you are quite within your rights to do as you please with it. I, on the other hand, will decline. And there, readers, is the rub. The Home Office knows damn well that far too many of us will decline – that’s why they want compulsion. Any suggestion that this scheme is voluntary was always a sham. No, let’s be clear here and say what I really mean. Any suggestion that this scheme was, in any way voluntary was a lie.
Update: The government just lost.
—–