December 20, 2004
NO HANCOCK'S THEY:
ID cards defend the ultimate civil liberty: From preventing benefit fraud to winning the War on Terror, why I am supporting today’s Bill (CHARLES CLARKE, 12/20/04, Times of London)
I HAVE long been a strong supporter of the benefits of identity cards. I became convinced of the advantages as a weapon in fighting crime when I was Police Minister from 1999 to 2001. I backed David Blunkett’s proposals when we discussed them in Cabinet and as Education Secretary I told the Home Affairs Select Committee last April of my personal support for the principle.That is why I will today propose that the House of Commons gives a second reading to the Identity Cards Bill. I have been urged by opponents of this measure — such as Charles Kennedy and the Liberal Democrats — to “pause for thought” in the entirely forlorn hope that I will abandon the whole idea.
However, I believe that — quite apart from the security advantages — there will be enormous practical benefits. ID cards will potentially make a difference to any area of everyday life where you already have to prove your identity — such as opening a bank account, going abroad on holiday, claiming a benefit, buying goods on credit and renting a video. The possession of a clear, unequivocal and unique form of identity — in the shape of a card linked to a database holding biometrics — will offer significant benefits.
Moreover, their help in tackling fraud will save tens of millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money. Some £50 million a year is claimed illegally from the benefits systems using false identities. This money can be far better spent improving schools and hospitals and fighting crime and antisocial behaviour.
This drive towards secure identity is, of course, happening all over the world.
When the Founders set out to secure our liberties they not only pledged their Sacred honors to one another but then signed the Declaration of Independence and published it for all to see. Today's fatuous civil libertarians insist that liberty depends on an imagined right to hide your identity. Posted by Orrin Judd at December 20, 2004 9:40 AM
Yes, but will national ID cards actually help the problem, or create a new bureaucracy and a whole new set of vulnerabilities?
Posted by: Mike Earl at December 20, 2004 11:53 AMMike:
Everyone has a social security card a drivers license a credit cartd a bank card, etc. Just make it all one card.
Posted by: oj at December 20, 2004 12:03 PMNothing inherently wrong with an identity card. In the private sector they are ubiquitous. However, what the state decides to put on that little magnetic stripe in addition to what is printed on the card needs to be debated openly.
Posted by: Ed Bush at December 20, 2004 12:34 PMEd: The question is, what can they put on it that they don't already know?
Posted by: David Cohen at December 20, 2004 3:11 PMDon't forget the secret ballot -- that's a privacy right worth fighting for.
Posted by: Twn at December 20, 2004 8:08 PMMr. Judd;
Speaking as someone who works with computer security for a living, I can say that your idea of putting it all on one card is a very bad one, if one wants actual security. It creates a single point of failure, which is considered a cardinal error by people who build secure systems.
For instance, among big financial companies, a common rule is that no network path from the Internet to their servers can pass through the firewalls of only one vendor for precisely this reason.
Of course, if your goal is improved convenience or control without regard to security, then it might be a different matter.
Posted by: Annoying Old Guy at December 20, 2004 9:36 PM