ID cards: the thin end of an authoritarian wedge
Maybe the benefits of ID cards would outweigh the costs if they could be introduced at the flick of a switch. But the cost and effort would be huge. (The costings produced by Labour Together look more than optimistic.) So, ID cards might be a 'nice-to-have' if the government was on an even keel, with the luxury of time and resources to spare – but it isn't. The government needs to be much better at focusing finite resources – especially delivery expertise – on the problems that really matter (the NHS, housing, schools) and stop wasting time on things that don't.Simon RewLondon
ID cards are the slippery slope to control. When everything in your life is connected to a digital ID, it is simple to ensure that you comply. I am a tax-paying, law-abiding citizen, and if an authority (ie the police) wishes to know my name and address, I am happy to tell them. If they are not happy with my answer and deem that I am committing some offence, they can arrest me.
I feel no obligation to prove who I am. What I get very concerned about is giving some authority the ability to control me. I might be part of a peaceful demonstration, protesting against a government decision that I do not agree with. With universal ID, it would be very easy to request a person's card, record it and then mark someone as a possible dissenter. Let's not usher something along these lines in to appease the likes of Nigel Farage. Call him out for what he is.
My mother, who had to deal with the Nazis in Holland (she was hustled to a German work camp as slave labour) said to me: 'Never live in a country that demands you carry an ID.'Anthony BaylisEgham, Surrey
Good luck with the proposals for a digital identity system. Recently I tried to log into my HMRC account to give my bank details to obtain a tax refund. Although I have had the account since Covid, I was told that I now needed to verify my identity by providing a passport or driving licence. I do not drive and my passport expired a while ago. I am therefore excluded from the app. Will people like me also be excluded from applying for a universal ID?Teresa Loyd-JonesNottingham
Polly Toynbee blithely deals with the obvious risks of identity cards in a couple of lines. She writes that a fairly serious problem like having your 'access to everything' cut off would have to be 'dealt with instantly by senior enough officials to make robust decisions with rapid appeal to courts not blocked by backlogs'. Since none of that happens in pretty much any part of our society, a lot needs to change before I'd be happy with the BritCard as advertised.Ian DawsonHeywood, Lancashire
Surely Polly Toynbee was pulling her readers' collective legs? Every thought in this article appears to pander to Reform's anti-immigrant prejudices rather than make any kind of argument against them. ID cards, especially on smartphones, are wide open to abuse by any possible future authoritarian government. Is this the Polly I've admired for so many years?Dirk van SchieReigate, Surrey
Have an opinion on anything you've read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
13 minutes ago
- The Independent
Reform UK unveils ex-Tory MP Adam Holloway as latest defector
Nigel Farage has secured his latest defection from the Conservative Party, with ex-Tory MP Adam Holloway announcing he has become a member of Reform UK. The Reform leader will welcome Mr Holloway, a 60-year-old ex-army officer who was MP for Gravesham until July last year when he lost his seat to Labour, as the latest in a line of defectors from the Tories. He follows ex-Tory colleagues in parliament Dame Andrea Jenkyns Lee Anderson, Marco Longhi and Sir Jake Berry to jump ship to Mr Farage's party. Speaking as his defection was announced, Mr Holloway said: 'There comes a moment for many soldiers — and most politicians — when you realise the battle you think you're fighting isn't the one your leaders are waging. Many in Britain feel we may already have passed the point of no return. Our cities grow less cohesive, the country effectively bankrupt. 'That moment came for me watching Kemi Badenoch tell Trevor Phillips there are real differences between Reform UK and the Conservatives. She was right. The difference is the Reform leadership and voters grasp the scale of our national peril and back a party serious about addressing it. "I joined the Army to serve the country, not the institution. The same applies now. If we want to rescue Britain, we must be honest about who's still willing to fight for her." Mr Holloway was the Conservative MP for Gravesham from 2005 until last year's general election. He was briefly an assistant government whip in 2022 and held roles on the Home Affairs Committee and European Scrutiny Committee. He was replaced by Labour's Dr Lauren Sullivan at the election, losing his seat by 2,712 votes. During his time as a Tory MP, Mr Holloway was a vocal backer of his ex-colleagues Charlie Elphicke and Imran Khan, both of whom were convicted of sexual offences. Mr Holloway was found by the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards to have attempted to improperly influence judicial proceedings in attempting to have a judge block pre-sentencing character testimonies. Previously Mr Holloway was found by the sleaze watchdog to have breached MPs' rules by failing to register two rental properties and not declaring a payment and the source of a trip he took. Mr Holloway has also been asked to repay £1,000 after he tried to claim council tax on his parliamentary expenses twice. Mr Farage told The Spectator: 'Adam's parliamentary and military experience will be vital as we look forward to the next general election'. The Reform leader added that Mr Holloway's 'bold move shows that we are the only serious option in Kent and is testament to the fantastic work our councillors are delivering across the region'. The ex-MP's defection to Reform comes as Mr Farage seeks to show his insurgent right-wing party is not running out of steam after a recent surge in the polls. There have been no defections of sitting MPs to Reform since Lee Anderson joined the party in March 2024. Those who have defected have typically done so after losing their seats fighting as Conservatives in the general election. In parliament, Mr Holloway voted against conducting air strikes on ISIS in 2014 after visiting the border with the Islamic State, and abstained on a vote for air strikes in 2015. In 2008, Adam Holloway accepted a trip to Syria and Lebanon from an organisation that described its aim as to engage with terrorist groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah in order to 'facilitate dialogue between political Islam and the West'. The Conservative Party declined to comment on the defection.
The Independent
13 minutes ago
- The Independent
Palestine Action High Court challenge can go ahead, judge rules
Palestine Action's co-founder has won a bid to bring a High Court challenge over the group's ban as a terror organisation. Huda Ammori is challenging Home Secretary Yvette Cooper's decision to proscribe the group under anti-terror laws, announced after the group claimed responsibility for action in which two Voyager planes were damaged at RAF Brize Norton on June 20. The ban means that membership of, or support for, the direct action group is a criminal offence punishable by up to 14 years in prison. Earlier this month, lawyers for Ms Ammori asked a judge to allow her to bring the High Court challenge over the ban, describing it as an 'unlawful interference' with freedom of expression. And in a decision on Wednesday, judge Mr Justice Chamberlain said that two parts of the arguments on Ms Ammori's behalf were 'reasonably arguable'. In his ruling, he said it was arguable that the proscription 'amounts to a disproportionate interference' of Ms Ammori's rights to freedom of expression and freedom of assembly. He said: 'That being so, the point will have to be determined at a substantive hearing and it would not be appropriate for me to say more now.' The judge continued that a second argument, that Ms Cooper failed to consult Palestine Action 'in breach of natural justice', could also go to a full hearing. He said: 'As a matter of principle, I consider that it is reasonably arguable that a duty to consult arose.' He continued: 'Having considered the evidence, I also consider it reasonably arguable that there was no compelling reason why consultation could not have been undertaken here.' Mr Justice Chamberlain refused to allow Ms Ammori to challenge the Government's decision on several other grounds, including a claim that the Home Secretary failed to gather sufficient information on Palestine Action's activities or the impact of the proscription on people associated with it. He also refused to allow Ms Ammori to argue that Ms Cooper breached her duty under the Equality Act, and took into account 'irrelevant considerations', such as whether Palestine Action's methods were 'morally or politically justifiable'. Following the ruling, Ms Ammori said: 'This landmark decision to grant a judicial review which could see the Home Secretary's unlawful decision to ban Palestine Action quashed, demonstrates the significance of this case for freedoms of speech, expression and assembly and rights to natural justice in our country and the rule of law itself.' She continued: 'We will not stop defending fundamental rights to free speech and expression in our country and supporting Palestinian people against a genocide being livestreamed before our eyes.' Raza Husain KC, for Ms Ammori, previously told the court at the hearing on July 21 that the ban had made the UK 'an international outlier' and was 'repugnant'. Mr Husain added: 'The decision to proscribe Palestine Action had the hallmarks of an authoritarian and blatant abuse of power.' The Home Office is defending the legal action. Sir James Eadie KC, for the department, said in written submissions that by causing serious damage to property, Palestine Action was 'squarely' within part of the terrorism laws used in proscription. He said: 'There is no credible basis on which it can be asserted that the purpose of this activity is not designed to influence the Government, or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and for the purpose of advancing a political, religious, racial or ideological cause.' Previously, Ben Watson KC, for the Home Office, said Palestine Action could challenge the Home Secretary's decision at the Proscribed Organisations Appeal Commission (POAC), a specialist tribunal, rather than at the High Court. Sir James said that an 'exceptional case' would be needed for it to go to the High Court, rather than the POAC. Mr Justice Chamberlain said on Wednesday that a High Court challenge could take place in the autumn of this year, whereas an appeal to the specialist tribunal would take much longer. He said: 'If it were necessary to appeal for deproscription, it is very unlikely that an application before POAC would be listed before the middle of 2026.' In his judgment, he said: 'If the legality of the proscription order can properly be raised by way of defence to criminal proceedings, that would open up the spectre of different and possibly conflicting decisions on that issue in magistrates' courts across England and Wales or before different judges or juries in the Crown Court. 'That would be a recipe for chaos. 'To avoid it, there is a strong public interest in allowing the legality of the order to be determined authoritatively as soon as possible. The obvious way to do that is in judicial review proceedings.' The judge also said that people protesting in support of Palestine and Gaza, but not expressing support for Palestine Action, had 'attracted various kinds of police attention, from questioning to arrest'. He continued that it was 'important not to draw too much from the fact that police and others appear to have misunderstood the law on some occasions'. But he added: 'Nonetheless, reports of the kind of police conduct referred to… are liable to have a chilling effect on those wishing to express legitimate political views. 'This effect can properly be regarded as an indirect consequence of the proscription order.' Ms Cooper announced plans to proscribe Palestine Action on June 23, saying that the vandalism of the two planes, which police said caused an estimated £7 million of damage, was 'disgraceful'.
The Independent
13 minutes ago
- The Independent
Reform poll delivers fresh blow to Starmer
New polling reveals that Reform voters largely prefer Jeremy Corbyn over Sir Keir Starmer across most metrics, despite Sir Keir's attempts to shift Labour to the right. The survey, conducted by Merlin Strategy for Novara Media, indicates Reform voters view Mr Corbyn as more authentic, honest, principled, and capable of radical decisions than Sir Keir. Sir Keir was only seen more favourably than Mr Corbyn regarding his standing on the world stage. The poll results coincide with Sir Keir's public approval rating reaching a new low, with many voters perceiving his government as chaotic. The findings follow Mr Corbyn's recent launch of a new political party with Zarah Sultana, which he claims has attracted over 600,000 sign-ups.
