Identity Cards

[Domh245]

Fair point about the cost of a passport. Although I can’t help but think the number of people who can’t afford a passport and can’t obtain/don’t want a driving licence must be vanishingly small. I guess an ID scheme would cost what it costs and the question is how that cost is apportioned between the taxpayer and the applicant.

Might the same thing be achieved (for less cost) by simply subsidising the cost of passports? These have the advantage of not needing to be changed every time someone moves, as they don’t contain address details

True, it probably is vanishingly small but like I said, if they're pressing ahead with voter ID (particularly if it is photo ID rather than just the poll card) then you have to ensure that all bases are covered. I suppose that subsidising passport costs or creating some sort of scheme that allows paying it as 10x £7 payments would achieve much the same thing, something for the Government to think about perhaps. That's assuming of course that they are doing this to clamp down on those 28 alleged cases of in-person fraud in 2017, and not to try to disenfranchise people without photo ID who would be more likely to Labour

 

[Jonny]

The issue for 'mandatory carry' is that it makes for checkpoints to be set up anywhere and everywhere, for no apparent reason (or no good reason whatsoever). It risks causing situations where the innocent are repeatedly inconvenienced at such checkpoints.

 

[Jonny]

True, it probably is vanishingly small but like I said, if they're pressing ahead with voter ID (particularly if it is photo ID rather than just the poll card) then you have to ensure that all bases are covered. I suppose that subsidising passport costs or creating some sort of scheme that allows paying it as 10x £7 payments would achieve much the same thing, something for the Government to think about perhaps. That's assuming of course that they are doing this to clamp down on those 28 alleged cases of in-person fraud in 2017, and not to try to disenfranchise people without photo ID who would be more likely to Labour

It is said that even allegations are the tip of the iceberg. Remember Lutfur Rahman? Ever heard of Marsha-Jane Thompson?

Both proven to have interfered with the democratic process; both associated with the left of politics - where most of the opposition to voter ID comes from.

 

[Domh245]

I had been under the impression that in those cases postal vote fraud had been a major issue, in addition to personation. If the Tories were serious about cracking down on voter fraud, they'd be also looking into ways of improving postal votes and other such loopholes, rather than just personation. A cynic would suggest that they aren't cracking down on postal voting because it'd have an impact on them (or at least, wouldn't impact other parties as much)

 

[Bletchleyite]

As noted, driving licence can't be issued to everyone

Except all it requires is legislation to say that they can. It's the usual approach in the US. You just issue one with no driving entitlement on it using existing processes for anyone who wants one that doesn't drive. Make it a different colour or something.

 

[etr221]

I don’t mind a voluntary scheme but they should not be compulsory....carrying one should definitely not be compulsory. Pretty sure a certain government did that back in the 1940’s.

The British government?

The UK had Identity cards from September 1939 (introduced as a wartime measure) until 1952, with, I understand, an obligation to carry and produce them on demand. They did not (normally) have a photograph, only number, name and address: date of birth, and I think some other information, were included in the associated national register - and so could be used for checking the authenticity of the card. See http://www.historyandpolicy.org/pol...itain-past-experience-and-policy-implications for more details.

Whether there should be a national identity card system, including a corresponding register, depends on whether somebody should be required to prove their identity - for any 'national' purpose - or whether a simple declaration of name and address should be regarded as adequate.

It is would be an interesting line if someone were to argue that what is sufficient for someone to get a criminal record (declaration of name and address - see thread that inspired this) was insufficient for them to be allowed to vote.

 

[DarloRich]

Personally I wouldn't mind, in principle, carrying such a card. The government already holds the information a card would require and I already carry a driving license card in my wallet. What is the difference? That said I am unsure which side of the balance between personal liberty and information/national security to come down on.

No. Definitely not in favour of ID cards.

I don’t want the state having any more information about me than strictly necessary and being required to carry/produce ID on demand smacks of a police state to me. If carrying them was only optional it’s difficult to see the point.

Driving licence/passport should suffice for most people surely.

I take the point - however, what further information would an ID card require that a driving license doesn't? Additionally could they not be one and same card?

I'd rather just have an optional scheme if even we were to have one at all. I find it just as easy to have a driving licence or passport for identification purposes.

I don’t mind a voluntary scheme but they should not be compulsory....carrying one should definitely not be compulsory. Pretty sure a certain government did that back in the 1940’s.

What would be the point of a voluntary system?

I have opened (or tried to) several bank accounts recently as I was moving money around looking for best interest rates. Every time I have to take a wad of documents (Council Tax bills, previous bank statements, driving licence, utility bills etc) into the bank to try to prove who I am despite having been born and lived in UK all my life. I have been refused twice because there were "disparities" in the addresses. For example my county being "Monmouthshire" on some documents and "Gwent" (a previous name) on others, and the fact that the road I live on has no name. Post Office Savings was one refusal and you'd think that they of all people would understand addresses, and the Principality Building Society could only open an account for me after a senior manager managed to "trick" their computer. They say "Sorry, but our computer just rejects it". I even take a letter I obtained from my local council stating what my official address is, and confirming that my road has no name, but if it is different from the bank's database (that they buy from God knows where) it's no-go.

That's more anti money laundering regulations than any other issue.

The issue for 'mandatory carry' is that it makes for checkpoints to be set up anywhere and everywhere, for no apparent reason (or no good reason whatsoever). It risks causing situations where the innocent are repeatedly inconvenienced at such checkpoints.

what are you talking about? People don't half go funny when this topic comes along!

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

Don't you have a birth certificate? Were you not born here?

My birth certificate would not be much use in proving that I was a British citizen, as I was both born after 1983 and in another country. I am nevertheless a British citizen.

 

[AlterEgo]

My birth certificate would not be much use in proving that I was a British citizen, as I was both born after 1983 and in another country. I am nevertheless a British citizen.

It raises an interesting question of how I prove my own citizenship beyond any doubt.

 

[njamescouk]

forget it.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

If we had an ID Card scheme in the UK, no doubt it would be implemented by someone like Serco/G4S/Atos or one of the other "outsourcing specialists" who are all extremely competent and have never previously screwed up any similar state-run initiatives...

So, it's a big fat NO from me.

 

[bearhugger]

I pretty much agree with DarloRich on this. I also think having all your details (that are already stored elsewhere, locally and nationally) in one central & more importantly secure place can make it so much easier for checks to take place.

Personally I wouldn't mind, in principle, carrying such a card. The government already holds the information a card would require and I already carry a driving license card in my wallet. What is the difference? That said I am unsure which side of the balance between personal liberty and information/national security to come down on.



I take the point - however, what further information would an ID card require that a driving license doesn't? Additionally could they not be one and same card?





What would be the point of a voluntary system?



That's more anti money laundering regulations than any other issue.



what are you talking about? People don't half go funny when this topic comes along!

 

[Elwyn]

If you speak to any person from a country that does have national identity cards (and there are many) eg France, Italy, Switzerland, Spain, Portugal etc etc, they nearly all find it convenient to have an ID card. It’s a back up travel document to their passport but more importantly it easily helps them establish their age and identity in a range of everyday situations, such as obtaining age discounted tickets or proving your age in a bar etc. I have met hundreds who possess them and have never heard any complain about them as intrusive or unnecessary.


It’s odd that the idea causes so much contentious discussion and hot air in the UK. I am sure the Europeans must all be wrong about it and we are right.

 

[Geezertronic]

I pretty much agree with DarloRich on this. I also think having all your details (that are already stored elsewhere, locally and nationally) in one central & more importantly secure place can make it so much easier for checks to take place.

Same here. I have a Passport and a Driving License card with the same photo on it so it shouldn't be too difficult to integrate into that existing setup. Also I am high level security cleared for my job so they probably know more about me than I do

 

[hexagon789]

What would be the point of a voluntary system?

You can get one if you want one but you can't be forced to carry one at all times.

 

[DarloRich]

You can get one if you want one but you can't be forced to carry one at all times.

what would be the point of that?

 

[hexagon789]

what would be the point of that?

Well perhaps not ID cards per se but I was thinking along the lines of "non driver" driving licences for identification purposes, something which may become necessary if proof of identity is required to cast a ballot in the future.

 

[Bletchleyite]

what would be the point of that?

Because those who don't drive and don't travel abroad have a right faff of proving their identity these days, particularly now almost all bills are online. And even if you do have a passport, it's a bit big to carry in your wallet and expensive to replace if lost or damaged.

 

[Bromley boy]

I take the point - however, what further information would an ID card require that a driving license doesn't? Additionally could they not be one and same card?

My objection isn’t that it would contain more info per se, just that it would be yet another database my name was on, yet another government agency holding information about me.

Plus I imagine the cost of implementing a scheme which was fit for purpose would be enormous. If it was made voluntary that would remove the first part of my objection, as I could choose not to sign up, but the issue of expense would remain.

It raises an interesting question of how I prove my own citizenship beyond any doubt.

Presumably tax or national insurance records would be your best bet of establishing residence for a long enough period to allow citizenship to be applied for.

Because those who don't drive and don't travel abroad have a right faff of proving their identity these days, particularly now almost all bills are online. And even if you do have a passport, it's a bit big to carry in your wallet and expensive to replace if lost or damaged.

I’d suggest those people invest in a passport or provisional driving licence which will serve for most purposes. Implementing a brand new scheme just for them seems to be a sledgehammer to crack a walnut.

I reckon it’s time the population was encouraged to take take a bit more responsibility for themselves in these matters, without relying on the government to provide an expensive solution to an easily solveable (by the individual) problem.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I’d suggest those people invest in a passport or provisional driving licence which will serve for most purposes. Implementing a brand new scheme just for them seems to be a sledgehammer to crack a walnut.

I reckon it’s time the population was encouraged to take take a bit more responsibility for themselves in these matters, without relying on the government to provide an expensive solution to an easily solveable (by the individual) problem.

Passports are rather costly and inconveniently sized, and not everyone is entitled to a provisional driving licence.

The sensible low-cost solution is to allow driving licences without any driving entitlement to be issued for those who cannot (e.g. on medical grounds) or do not wish to drive. The cost of this would be very low, and it is the usual way ID is "done" in the US.

 

[Bromley boy]

The sensible low-cost solution is to allow driving licences without any driving entitlement to be issued for those who cannot (e.g. on medical grounds) or do not wish to drive. The cost of this would be very low, and it is the usual way ID is "done" in the US.

That might be a better, more cost effective, solution. I have no idea what the current rules around provisional licence entitlement are if the actual right to drive is withdrawn on medical grounds.

 

[GB]

what would be the point of that?

Why do you wan't to force people to have one and why do you want to force them to carry it?

 

[WelshBluebird]

what would be the point of that?

Just to name 3:

• A universal government approved ID that everyone can own for purposes of age related ID (such as buying booze etc) that will not be whinged at by bouncers for being fake (seriously, try using any ID apart from a driving licence or passport - good luck! Even in places that claim to accept cards like Validate - many don't).
• A universal government approved ID that everyone can use for ID related purposes (such as opening a bank account).
• A universal government approved ID that should be able to prove someones residency status as a defense against being deported despite being here legally.

 

[DarloRich]

Why do you wan't to force people to have one and why do you want to force them to carry it?

I dont - i just don't get the point of a voluntary scheme. it seems a waste of time.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

My objection isn’t that it would contain more info per se, just that it would be yet another database my name was on, yet another government agency holding information about me.

Plus I imagine the cost of implementing a scheme which was fit for purpose would be enormous. If it was made voluntary that would remove the first part of my objection, as I could choose not to sign up, but the issue of expense would remain.



Presumably tax or national insurance records would be your best bet of establishing residence for a long enough period to allow citizenship to be applied for.



I’d suggest those people invest in a passport or provisional driving licence which will serve for most purposes. Implementing a brand new scheme just for them seems to be a sledgehammer to crack a walnut.

I reckon it’s time the population was encouraged to take take a bit more responsibility for themselves in these matters, without relying on the government to provide an expensive solution to an easily solveable (by the individual) problem.

I'd have less of an issue if such a scheme WAS to be managed by the state. Everything is outsourced these days, often with very little oversight.

 

[Mag_seven]

I've voted "no" for this - I work on the principle that any idea that further erodes our hard fought for freedoms deserves to be strangled at birth.

 

[EM2]

I've voted "no" for this - I work on the principle that any idea that further erodes our hard fought for freedoms deserves to be strangled at birth.

How does this idea do that?

 

[transmanche]

I'm one of the few people in the UK who actually had a UK Government ID card, before the scheme was repealed.

For me it was great for travelling around Europe and saved me having two passports; also very handy for those times when you do need to show who you are - collecting items from the post office, some transactions in banks to name two.

I'd have one again with no reservations, so long as it works for European borders.

This is why a voluntary ID card scheme would be great. In fact, I would say that every UK passport issued should be accompanied by a passport/ID card which can be used for cross-border travel. (Of course with us exiting the EU, this may no longer be possible anyway.)

US citizens can apply for a passport book or a passport card (or both). The passport card can be used to travel to nearby countries and is de facto a national ID card. I think that the UK should have something similar.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I dont - i just don't get the point of a voluntary scheme. it seems a waste of time.

I assume you travel abroad (as I'm aware you don't drive). What if you didn't?

 

[Bromley boy]

I assume you travel abroad (as I'm aware you don't drive). What if you didn't?

Then it would be tough luck.

That is a vanishingly small part of the population. People in that scenario should simply apply for a passport and deal with the mild inconvenience of having to carry it on occasions when they need photo ID.

Mild inconvenience for a small % of the population doesn’t justify squandering billions of taxpayers’ money (because that’s no doubt what it will end up costing) on another white elephant ID card scheme.