![]() |
|
![]() |
| Vincent Cable | 3rd December 2008 | <info@vincentcable.org.uk> |
Will ID cards change anything?Written by Vincent Cable MP and published in Informer on Mon 13th Feb 2006 Parliament has returned to the issue of ID cards. The government is pressing ahead. The arguments are several and keep changing. It is variously claimed that ID cards are necessary to stop terrorism, illegal immigration, benefits abuse and, most recently, fraud. In fact, ID cards would not have stopped the London and New York attacks. The terrorist attacks in Spain occurred despite ID cards. Asylum seekers and immigrants already have to carry ID before they can work or access benefits. Benefit and other fraud is rarely due to mistaken identity. But, even if the benefits are overstated, perhaps ID cards could do some good? Sadly the government is hopelessly incompetent at running big, complex, projects based on computers. The Inland Revenue is in crisis. The tax credit system makes endless mistakes. The Immigration and Nationality Department is unbelievably incompetent. How can the same people manage millions of ID cards? Moreover, the cost is staggering. The London School of Economics estimated up to £20billion. This is probably an underestimate. Either the cost will be paid in higher taxes or through a large fee. Much depends on whether ID cards are compulsory. Voluntary cards will do a little good and little harm. Compulsion is different. Will elderly people who never travel have to pay hundreds of pounds for an ID card they don't need? What happens if residents are stopped in the street by police and do not have an ID card which is lost, stolen or at home? If they are released, the check is meaningless. If they are detained, police stations will be swamped by innocent people. The civil liberties implications are immense. A sensible government would retreat. There is no sign of that, yet.
Bookmark this story at:
Published and promoted by Vincent Cable, 2A Lion Road, Twickenham, Middlesex TW1 4JQ. The views expressed are those of the party, not of the service provider. |