It is, I would suggest, an axiom of dealing with this current government that whenever they go on a major PR offensive the first thing you should do is look around for what’s being quietly snuck out the back door in the hope that no one will notice. So, in view of today’s ‘charm’ offensive on ID cards - which, typically has been long on offensive and short on charm - it should come as no great surprise to find the sudden appearance from the bowels of the Treasury’s website, of a two year old report by Sir James Crosby entitled, ‘Challenges and Opportunities in Identity Management‘ (pdf) and that there are some very good reasons why its taken two years to surface.
The report makes various suggestions as to how the government should operate an ID card scheme, but it may not surprise you to discover that they have ignored virtually all of them and carried on in their own blundering way to create the most intrusive, consumer-unfriendly scheme you can imagine.
Read the full Ministry of Truth post HERE. And if you are an MP opposed to ID cards you might want to ask some questions on this...
7 comments:
Quick correction - the report isn't two years old as I first though (my mistake - its because I've known this report was due for a good while, which put it on the 'unpublished' list along with the gateway review that Spyblog is chasing though the Information Tribunal, which is getting on for that old)
It was commissioned two years ago, gave a preliminary report 12 months ago, before Gordon stepped up to the top job, and has now issued a detailed report, which I understand says nothing it didn't say last year but merely beefs up the detail behind its arguments.
I'm currently trying to ascertain exactly when Crosby actually reported to the Treasury to see how long its been sat on for news management purposes.
...all of which the government has still completely and utterly ignored in setting out its revised strategy for pushing ID cards forwards and which, building on input from the private sector and especially the banking industry, take a completely different approach to the government.
And its sneaked the thing out on the quiet hoping that no one will notice because, I very much suspect that many will seeing the banking industry as being much more savvy about handling personal information than the government.
Okay, so my mistake not Iain's on the exact date, but the analysis stands and the government has definitely had the meat of this for 12 months and kept schtum.
Iain, you're entirely ignoring the whole basis of the 'report' strategy. The purpose of commissioning 'reports' is to aid the political process - it's nothing at all to do with getting to the truth or finding a sensible way of carrying on.
The 'report' move is to shut the opposition up, to allow the government a free hand to do what it intended in the first place, amd/or to diminish potential embarrassment to Ministers.
Are you feeling not very well, or something? Do promise me you'll buck up. This is Politics for Juniors, Lesson Two.
Good spot, Iain.
I thought he ...was a she ? Certainly drones on like a woman.With all 'due' respect.
"whenever they go on a major PR offensive the first thing you should do is look around for what’s being quietly snuck out the back door"
Correct - or as I have been saying for years its all "smoke and mirrors", and/or to coin another conjouring term, 'misdirection'.
Its hard to credit I know but there are still some people who actually believe what this government is saying, whereas in reality they should realise that the govt are going to do eacxtly the opposite of what they say.
And unsworth you are quite right, this 'report' business - it has been going on from day one. The first example of it of course was the report by on PR, by the chrming but guilless and gullible Lord Jenkins. Labour conned the libdems into supporting them in then 97 election in return for this report, and of course it was immediately dropped.
I am amazed that any libdem has the effrontery to show their face following this fiasco.. It just highlights the desperate lengths people will go to to earn a shilling that they are willing to.
In reply to Trevor H at 11.30 PM, I wish people would stop using the phrases "smoke and mirrors" and 'misdirection'. As the actions of our political representatives have shown recently, 'lies' and 'dishonesty' are better and more accurate phrases.
"The government" also commissioned a report on the effects of cannabis and subsequently ignored all of the findings and recommendations. The phrase "What can we waste taxpayer's money on next?" springs to mind.
Post a Comment