You are reporting the following comment to the PledgeBank team:
Oh, you're a troll! Sorry for being so slow working that out, but there are a lot of people with some genuinely very strange, groundless beliefs about ID cards, and it was easy to believe you might be one of them.
Nonetheless, (ignoring all of the irrelevant - although reasonable - environmental stuff), you do raise some points which proponents of the ID scheme could potentially pick up on, so it's worth addressing a couple of them anyway.
"2013...7 years from now...I am sure technology will enable us to overcome all of your concerns by then."
Well no, obviously it won't. The officially compulsory phase of the scheme isn't due to come into force until 2013 (or presumably 2014 now, since the lengthy Parliamentary debates have set it all back a year), and that's only for the full version of the *current plans*. The things you're suggesting (e.g. it being compulsory to carry the cards, and that you won't be able to get access to basic services like transport or shops without it) could potentially be introduced one day, I suppose, but it will be decades at the earliest. Not, I hasten to add, that it would be a good thing if they were! If someone has a conviction for something 20 years ago, and has been a model citizen since, it really should not be possible for society to continue to punish them for it forever, so the world you are advocating (or pretending to, probably) is certainly not one I would want to live in.
"5% of our social security payments saved? Thats enough to give every Pensioner £300 at least per year towards extra energy bills."
It really isn't, you know. If the LSE report (among others) is even half-right, then the ID scheme itself (even if it works perfectly) would take far more money to set up and maintain than it might save in reduced benefit fraud. Thus the country overall would end up worse off with this scheme in place than we are without it.Nic Shakeshaft, 11 years ago.