Conservatives commit to scrap ID cards

[S. Gonzales Esq.]

Shadow Home Secretary warns firms bidding for contracts that they'll scrap the scheme if they win the election:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/jun/17/con...

[groucho]

Good. They get my vote for that alone.

[Skipppy]

Same here. I can hear Broon bleeting on about terrorism now though.

[him_over_there]

Excellent.

[Eric Mc]

I can see the scenario in a year's time.

Conservative Home Secretary statement Autumn 2010 -

"Following a review of the binding legal contracts already in place, I have decided that the best option for the Exchequer is to continue with the Identity Card Scheme as originally set out in the "We Want To Know Everything About You Act 2009".

[groucho]

Eric Mc said:

I can see the scenario in a year's time.

Conservative Home Secretary statement Autumn 2010 -

"Following a review of the binding legal contracts already in place, I have decided that the best option for the Exchequer is to continue with the Identity Card Scheme as originally set out in the "We Want To Know Everything About You Act 2009".

Then I'll be on here moaning.

[Dunk76]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

There was a period where central Government projects were actually paying firms to bid on things as most IT Services/Outsourcers weren't interested. This came about because a) EDS were winning everything going and in a civil service bereft of imagination and initiative this was making them automatic first choice for other projects and b) the whole projects were often so protracted and politicised that it wasn't worth the bother. I understand this is still the case on many things.

More often than not, the businesses bidding for these contracts will put in place some pretty onerous clauses with regards cancellation or termination of project - some I've seen are often so punitive that it's theoretically cheaper for the buyer to actually see the project through to completion.

There is too much money invested by too many large scary firms, some with stakes in the highly influential defence sector, so this to go away as easily as a change of Government and large red rubber stamp marked CANCELLED.

[FoolOnTheHill]

They always had my vote. Even more so now.

[Eric Mc]

The Concorde project continued because the cancellation fees were expected to be nmore costly than continuing.

[Don]

I can imagine this evil lot committing the government to legally binding contracts.

However. Cameron could always introduce the "Sorting Out This fk Up" bill that simply says we have changed the law so that anything a previous administration committed us to is null and void, tough.

Parliament. It makes the law. Very powerful ability, that. It's not quite as good as being "above" the law - but almost...

[Zod]

this is why the Tories are making a fuss - to prevent firms from signing contracts with onerous penalty clauses.

In any case, paying out on a penalty clause would cost the taxpayer less than carrying through any government IT scheme.

It's also open to government to decide that its predecessors didn't act appropriately in agreeing onerous terms. The other party could attempt to recover through the courts, but that would be a lengthy process that would risk much greater losses. Government holds most of the cards in this game.

Edited by Zod on Wednesday 17th June 10:42

[unrepentant]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

Is it not the case that contracts will not be awarded until after the election? Just putting together a bid on this scale is probably very expensive so are the Torys not saying to companies "don't waste your money putting a bid together as we won't be awarding any contracts". Seems very fair and companies are forewarnednot to waste their money.

[colonel c]

I can’t help but think the drive behind ID cards is not politically driven. Morel likely it’s being pushed from within the ‘establishment, Civil Service etc’ call them what you will.
My gut feeling is that a Tory government will change it’s mind on this issue when in power.

[s2art]

colonel c said:

I can’t help but think the drive behind ID cards is not politically driven. Morel likely it’s being pushed from within the ‘establishment, Civil Service etc’ call them what you will.
My gut feeling is that a Tory government will change it’s mind on this issue when in power.

Doubt it. Where is the money to pay for it going to come from?

[Eric Mc]

I ALWAYS think that the prime movers behind MUCH legislation are the higher ecehlons of the Civil Service itself.

Government is so concerned with image building and self-absorption that they leave the running of the country to the Civil Servants.

[colonel c]

s2art said:

colonel c said:

I can’t help but think the drive behind ID cards is not politically driven. Morel likely it’s being pushed from within the ‘establishment, Civil Service etc’ call them what you will.
My gut feeling is that a Tory government will change it’s mind on this issue when in power.

Doubt it. Where is the money to pay for it going to come from?

The government will always find the cash for the things they want to do.
Unless I’m mistaken the Tories were all in favour in the 90s when they were in power and the then Labour operation were against ID cards.
Funny how things change.

[Marf]

colonel c said:

s2art said:

colonel c said:

I can’t help but think the drive behind ID cards is not politically driven. Morel likely it’s being pushed from within the ‘establishment, Civil Service etc’ call them what you will.
My gut feeling is that a Tory government will change it’s mind on this issue when in power.

Doubt it. Where is the money to pay for it going to come from?

The government will always find the cash for the things they want to do.
Unless I’m mistaken the Tories were all in favour in the 90s when they were in power and the then Labour operation were against ID cards.
Funny how things change.

Can you dig anything up to support that assertion, as far as I know the tories oppose ID cards/NIR as the scheme kind of flies in the face of traditional tory values, i.e. minimial state intervention in the lives of the electorate.

[elster]

I doubt very much whether they will scrap the entire infrastructure.

More likely use it for areas that are restricted access. Ports, Airports, Military bases, etc. So if you are having to work in that area, you will need an ID card.

[colonel c]

Marf said:

colonel c said:

s2art said:

colonel c said:

I can’t help but think the drive behind ID cards is not politically driven. Morel likely it’s being pushed from within the ‘establishment, Civil Service etc’ call them what you will.
My gut feeling is that a Tory government will change it’s mind on this issue when in power.

Doubt it. Where is the money to pay for it going to come from?

The government will always find the cash for the things they want to do.
Unless I’m mistaken the Tories were all in favour in the 90s when they were in power and the then Labour operation were against ID cards.
Funny how things change.

Can you dig anything up to support that assertion, as far as I know the tories oppose ID cards/NIR as the scheme kind of flies in the face of traditional tory values, i.e. minimial state intervention in the lives of the electorate.

As recently as 2004 The Tories led by Michael Howard were backing New Labour over Id Cards.

Google it for more info.

Here is something to be going on with.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/howard-faces-rev...

[Sheets Tabuer]

Eric Mc said:

I ALWAYS think that the prime movers behind MUCH legislation are the higher ecehlons of the Civil Service itself.

Government is so concerned with image building and self-absorption that they leave the running of the country to the Civil Servants.

I said this a while back when someone asked how hard was it to be prime minister, I said if it was that hard they wouldn't let just anyone do it.

People said it was a really hard job, is it feck most things are decided by civil servants and most policy by lobby groups, the PM just has to stand up and flap his mouth open and closed once a week in the commons and all that is scripted.