Longrider

Hot on the heels of the climbdown over airside ID cards, Alan Johnson regales us with some bunkum about why we need ID cards and soon.

Our identity, the information that makes us unique, is something that we get called upon to prove each day…

No we fucking don’t you simpleton. I am rarely asked to identify myself and on the few occasions that it is necessary, it is because you – and those like you – have made it necessary with your obsessive and paranoid binge legislation.

It is this unique information that fraudsters and criminals want and this is why we guard it so carefully.

Indeed and part of that is not giving it to the government to put onto a leaky database. I know precisely who I am and if I think you might need to know, I might deign to tell you. I might also tell you to mind your own damned business, depending on the circumstances and who is asking.

Shredding machines, once only found in offices, are now found in many homes as people protect their personal information by destroying personal bank and billing information.

Indeed and they are far more useful than an identity card or putting all of our sensitive information on a government database.

The introduction of identity cards is a simple means of helping you, and I, protect our unique identity from fraudsters. Identity fraud costs the UK economy £1.2bn on average each year and causes misery for tens of thousands who fall victim.

Oh, for fuck’s fuckitty fucking fuck’s sake. The only fraud here is the figure your predecessors plucked out of their collective arseholes. Identity fraud does not cost £1.2bn or £1.7bn as is sometimes claimed by these lying charlatans. It actually costs around £27m.

At a cost of just £30, the identity card is a cheap way of helping fight back.

Bollocks.

So, despite the headlines that would have readers think otherwise, I’m not scrapping identity cards…

Well, yes. I realise that there was a note of caution (given that I never trust anything a politician or journalist says) in my comments a couple of days ago, but I didn’t expect an article shilling this snake oil quite so soon.

…I’m committed to delivering them more quickly to the people who will benefit most.

The government, of course. There is no one else that they will benefit and if you really, really think otherwise, you are incredibly naive. These people want this so that they can keep tabs on us, there is no other reason that stacks up. None.

I know that some of you have real concerns about the government’s motives for introducing the card.

Really? I wonder why? perhaps because government ministers are nothing more than a bunch of self-serving, lying control-freak jackanapes, possibly?

When I announced this week that I would make identity cards wholly voluntary it was because I believe that there are real benefits that will make the card an attractive proposition for many people.

Yes, this would be “voluntary” as in “compulsory” if you want to work (particularly with children or vulnerable adults), travel abroad, teach or drive. That sort of “voluntary”?

I think the case for identity cards has been made…

What the fucking fuckitty fuck? The case has been demolished every time some half-wit of a minister has tried to justify it for national security to a cuddly “prove who you are” device. There is no case, there never was a case, there never will be a case. The only case you make here is that New Labour is as deluded as it ever was.

…but understand that getting a card will be a big decision for some people.

No it isn’t – not even remotely. I will never, under any circumstances carry one of your disgusting little pieces of plastic – and, should you still be in power when I need to renew my passport, I’ll take out French citizenship to avoid going on the database. The French, quite rightly, rejected a similar scheme when their government tried it on.

Easy or hard, I think it should be a voluntary decision, one that people choose to take, because they agree and welcome the benefits an identity card will provide.

Yes, that’s “voluntary” as in “compulsory” again, isn’t it?

In particular, I’m pleased that the government will be looking at bringing forward proposals for pensioners aged 75 and over to receive an identity card free of charge.

Oh, wow! The generation that lived through a war when we fought against a “papers please” state will get their very own “Papiere, Bitte” for free. How wonderfully generous you arseholes are; how fucking patronising. How low can you people sink?

I also want to see young people with identity cards.

Of course you do, you nasty little shit.

They will not only act as a proof of age for the individual but also empower communities tackling underage drinking and crime by enabling local retailers, including pubs and supermarkets, to help ensure they aren’t selling restricted goods, such as knives and alcohol, to those who are underage.

Young people can buy a citizen card (as I pointed out the other day) without giving any information to the government, and it costs less and is accepted by all the relevant licensed victuallers. Works perfectly. They don’t need another one. Piss off!

And this is why I have taken the decision to speed up the rollout of identity cards by announcing that alongside people in Manchester, residents in the wider north-west will also be able to apply for a card in the new year.

Well, I can only hope that the residents of the North West give you a collective two-fingered salute.

People believe in protecting what they have and what they have worked hard to achieve – a good name and a good credit rating. Being able to protect your identity from fraudsters who would use and abuse it is something we all want and I think identity cards can achieve this.

If you think that, then you have fallen for your own propaganda. The safest place for our sensitive information is as far away from government as possible – preferably in different places.

Jesus, what a fucktard.

—————————————-

Update: The comments are a hoot.

I see that national Express is walking away from its franchise for the East Coast Mainline.

The government is to nationalise Britain’s largest rail franchise after National Express confirmed that it can no longer afford the £1.4bn east coast contract.

In a serious blow to franchise policy, the Department for Transport will take the London-to-Edinburgh route into public ownership at the end of the year. The transport secretary, Lord Adonis, said the contract will be put back up for auction to private companies at the end of next year but it is expected to fetch much less than £1.4bn, leaving the state with a gap in its rail budget.

Given that GNER did something very similar a couple of years back, this should come as no surprise. The DfT is unimpressed:

“It is simply unacceptable to reap the benefits of contracts when times are good, only to walk away from them when times become more challenging,” said Adonis.

Either you have the dosh or you do not. Walking away is sometimes the only option.

Having watched developments in the industry from my time with BR back in the early nineties as it was initially privatised in what can only be described as politically driven chaos, the only surprise for me is that this has taken so long. For all the talk of it being private, it still swallows huge chunks of public money. The franchise idea with penalty clauses simply led to an industry within an industry as each company tried to pass off the cost of delays to each other. A good trust dealy attribution clerk is worth their weight in gold.

I have no ideological opposition to a privately run railway (I did once, but changed my mind). However, if it is impossible for it to be truly private and for the company to operate the whole system without paying huge sums to the government in franchise fees while another company takes it back to pay for the infrastructure and charges the train operator to run on it, and they all squabble about who is responsible for every minute’s delay then perhaps it’s time for a rethink.

One other problem – unrelated to franchises, but an unexpected consequence of privatisation – is that as Network Rail draws track work back in-house, small companies fall by the wayside. Unfortunately, this also means that there is a danger of specialist expertise being lost and no one noticing until they need it. Just thought I’d drop that one in.

Anyway, why it took this long for franchisees to decide that it ain’t worth it, baffles me.

Via JuliaM, this little gem.

Packs of red meat should carry warning labels advising shoppers to ration themselves to three portions a week, amid controversial claims that livestock production is killing the planet.

The proposals come from the World Wildlife Fund (WWF), which also wants Britons to switch to milk substitutes as part of a radical move away from dairy farming.

As if we don’t have enough self-appointed busybodies wagging their fingers and telling us what to do. And anyone who has tasted those milk substitutes will realise that they are foul, disgusting concoctions from the Devil’s own Kitchen (sorry). I like my dairy products, I like my full cream milk, full cream butter on my bread and when I do have a coffee, I have a nice dollop of cream in it – and have every intention of continuing to do so.

WWF insists that the recent campaign from Sir Paul McCartney to encourage people to go ‘Meat Free on Mondays’ does not go far enough.

As I mentioned at the time, it goes too far. It is none of McCartney’s damned business what other people eat.

The organisation suggests people could switch to eating more chicken and other poultry and drinking milk alternatives made from soya or rice.

It also argues people should switch to consuming much more fruit and vegetables.

The WWF is about to issue an 84 page report outlining strategies for reducing red meat and dairy consumption in order to cut greenhouse gas emissions.

Remind me not to give any money to this fake charity.

WWF insists that it is not telling people to stop eating red meat and dairy, rather to reduce the portions eaten per week.

Makes no difference, it is not their place to tell us to do anything, because it is none of their damned business.

Incidentally, I notice from the comments on the piece that people just don’t get it. This, for example:

But the hysterical reaction to any suggestion that we produce and consume too much meat and dairy is bonkers. Farming can still thrive in this country even if we produce less, health can improve if we eat a bit less, and it’ll help the environment. This isn’t a ‘bizarre’ suggestion; it’s actually a fairly minor lifestyle change. Eating meat with every meal is a recent phenomenon, not our ‘traditional eating habits’. Calm down people, this really isn’t that bad.

It is not about farming surviving or what we eat that is the issue – it is that a fake charity has set itself up to tell us what to do. It has no mandate to do this and the poison it whispers in the government’s ears will, sooner or later, come out as policy driven by “concerns raised”. That is why this is an issue.

Today, I’m sitting in a hotel room. In a little while, I’ll be wandering down to the restaurant. You can be absolutely sure that I will not be ordering the vegetarian option. Contrariness is the appropriate response to control freakery.

Alan Johnson is widely reported today making a climbdown on ID cards.

He said the cards will now only be issued to Britons on a voluntary basis meaning no one will ever be forced to have one, effectively paving the way for the scheme to be scrapped altogether.

A pilot scheme for airside workers, which marked the first attempt at making the £4.9 billion programme compulsory for British nationals has been abandoned.

Well, well, well. After all they hype, after the bluster and the lies, finally they hit reality head on. Over priced, unworkable and unnecessary.

Mr Johnson even admitted the suggestion the cards would help combat terrorism was exaggerated as he accepted the Government should never have allowed “the perception to go around that they were a panacea for terrorism”.

Good lord! Should they have not indeed? Well, I never. Has he okayed this with David Blunkett?

Instead, the Home Office is now concentrating on the cards being useful for youngsters to prove their age when going in to pubs.

There are already perfectly good products available for this without giving the government your personal details. And somewhat cheaper, too. As I don’t have this problem, It’s not an issue for me and I have no need to “prove who I am” all the time and on the odd occasion that I might need to produce a utility bill or two, I can live with it.

Of course, they are still making noises about rolling it out – well, they would, wouldn’t they? And, we have to be aware that the price of freedom is eternal vigilance. Despite Cameron’s promise to stop the project, none of us can be sure that a future government won’t be enticed to sneak in some aspect of this discredited scheme by stealth. It was, after all, the database not the cards themselves that posed the real danger. Let us not forget that. We do at our peril.

Still, it’s nice to see a climbdown. One little victory along the way.

Apparently the Queen wants more dosh.

The Queen faces a financial showdown with the Treasury after Buckingham Palace indicated that it intended to continue spending at current levels.

The Palace is asking for the first increase in the Civil List for two decades, arguing that it has already made substantial cuts.

Really? Well, perhaps they should look at making more. The company I visited today has recently reduced its paybills by asking its employees (and getting their agreement) to take a pay cut in order to stay afloat. In times of recession we all have to make sacrifices, cut one’s cloth so to speak. Unless, that is, you are Gordon Brown or, now it would appear, royalty.

Via The Great Simpleton, I am reminded about the grand Labour plan to steal people’s property.

Married Labour MPs Ann and Alan Keen have been given a month to stop their local council repossessing their home 10 miles from the House of Commons.

And why is this?

Hounslow Council has told the couple “urgent action” is needed to explain why their main home in Brentford is unoccupied.

The sheer effrontery is staggering. What fucking business is it of Hounslow Council’s what these people do with their property? None what-so-fucking-ever should be the answer and a sharp kick up the jacksie to boot.

But, no, this is our brave new world order we are talking about:

If the council does not get a satisfactory response from the Keens, it then has the power to issue an Empty Dwelling Management Order which would allow the council to take possession of the property and bring it back into use.

“Take possession” those are weasel words indeed. “Theft” is the appropriate description, theft, plain and simple.

Such orders became law five years ago in order to give local councils the power to take possession of empty properties and bring them back into use.

There is an irony here that it is a pair of Labour MPs who have been caught out. Perhaps, just perhaps, it will cause them to reflect on the evil they have helped to create, although I doubt it somehow.

And there are folk who think my comparisons between this deeply nasty authoritarian party and ZanuPF are inappropriate. It seems they become more appropriate with every passing day…

I got spammed again yesterday. Someone used the contact form to shill their sunglasses site. No, I am not giving you a linky, you cheeky git.

Has anyone ever managed to convince a blogger to provide a link from a spam email or comment? Anyone? Ever?

Oh, yes, and to the the Flying Rodent who left a very strange comment and then editied it out (I still have the original), I haven’t a clue what you were on about.

Following on from my comments yesterday, PDF has posted a very silly twitter:

Longrider doesn’t like me equating the BNP to the Nazis http://bit.ly/3tWEz – OK, if he stops equating Labour to ZanuPF http://bit.ly/N2yqV

That is not what I said. You would have to be incredibly dense or wilfully stupid to think that it was.

What I objected to – very clearly and in plain English, so even semi-literate fuckwits could understand it – was the comparing of a war waged against a hostile foreign power with a currently legal political party in the UK. As we are not waging a shooting war with the BNP at the moment, the comparison does not hold up. I have no problem whatsoever with comparing BNP policies with those of Hitler’s Nazis, given that there are, indeed, parallels and nothing I have said could lead a reasonable person to a contrary conclusion. And, frankly, since my original post back in 2005, comparisons between Labour and ZanuPF are more appropriate now given the state of the UK economy.

I suggest pdf ceases trying to be clever – it’s clearly not his forte.

Via PDF who goes along with this arrant piece of stupidity from the comments at Illiberal Conspiracy:

I hope it’s not too extreme to point out that our granddads’ response to their generation’s Nazis was to bomb them and strafe them from the air; to shoot them with machine guns and rifles; torch them with flamethrowers, incendiaries and white phosphorus; to crush them with tanks, blow them up with grenades and high explosives and so on, and then march their supporters off to prison. I don’t know how people could’ve missed this, since we have well-publicised memorials at which we salute their courage for kicking Nazi arse so righteously, every single year.

Not that I think this would be a reasonable response to the BNP, of course, but it sure puts all this Oooo, we must understand the motivations of poor, misguided racists who consciously vote for Nazi organisations in perspective.

It doesn’t put anything into perspective, being a rather silly piece of hyperbole. Our grandparents’ generation were at war with a hostile foreign power that had invaded its neighbours. We are not at war with the BNP – an organisation that happens to be a legal political party. You have to be particularly dense not to see the difference. If we do not allow the BNP freedom of speech, if we do not hear their arguments and understand why people support them, we cannot counter them, we cannot expose their nastiness, indeed, we become them – the very thing we rail against. One of the outcomes of our grandparents’ sacrifice was supposed to be freedom from this type of tyranny. When you allow political freedom, you allow it for all, no matter how vile we find their ideas; that is why we are supposed to be better than they are. Clearly, though, we are not – at least, some of us are not.

I’m rapidly growing irritated that I have to keep pointing out this truism to people who should damned well know better.

Via Letters from a Tory who comments at some length (as do the commenters on the thread), I see that Sarkozy is taking on Islam in a big way.

Today you will make a speech that could spark another ferocious debate over religious symbols and Islam in France.  Having caused uproar over your decision to ban any religious symbols in French schools, you are now considering banning the burka and other Islamic clothing which French MPs claim is degrading to women.  It is a debate that many other European countries will be watching with some interest, I daresay. 

Possibly so. However, while I share Sarkozy’s and LFAT’s disdain for the repression of women inherent in Islamic society, and while the clothing such as the Burqua and the niquab are potent symbols of that repression; banning such items makes us the very thing we despise.

No one tells me what I may (or may not) wear and I defend absolutely the right of anyone to wear their choice of clothing freely. It’s what makes us better than them.

You will notice a theme here, I suspect.