Against ID cards? Not in principle and not in person

Following on from Andrew's propagation of Nosemonkey's fine work, these are the Tory MPs that were not present at the recent ID card vote. The vote that passed the damnable things by a margin of 25 votes:

David Davies (Monmouthshire), Quentin Davies (Grantham & Stamford), Roger Gale (North Thanet), Michael Gove (Surrey Heath), Greg Hands (Hammersmith & Fulham), Daniel Kawczynski (Shrewsbury & Atcham), Peter Lilley (Hitchin & Harpenden), Michael Mates (East Hampshire), Richard Ottaway (Croydon South), Nicholas Soames (Mid Sussex), Anthony Steen (Totnes), Gary Streeter (South West Devon), Ian Taylor (Esher & Walton), Edward Vaizey (Wantage), Ann Widdecombe (Maidstone & The Weald), George Young (North West Hampshire).

As Andrew says, read 'em and weep.

I have sent the following to Peter Lilley MP:

Dear Peter,

The blogosphere is awash with the names of the Tory MPs that were
not present at the recent ID card vote in the commons. The vote that
passed the damnable things by 25 votes. Your name is on that list.

I let my membership of the Tory party lapse last year on the basis of
Tory support for these cards in principle and I see that, in spite of
subsequent talk, nothing has changed.

I am in your constituency and I am also the Chairman of the 1952
committee details of which can be found here:

http://www.theenglandproject.net/1952committee.html

Please let me know when a Conservative Party rises like a pheonix
from the ashes of the present shambles.

Many thanks.

I have received this response from Christine who was, apparently, personally asked by Peter Lilley to respond to my email:

Peter Lilley has asked me to thank you for your email. He voted against the ID Cards Bill at every stage prior to the Report Stage last night even when he was whipped to vote in favour. Last night, he left a dinner he was addressing to vote against the Bill at 9 'clock, but regrettably he did not manage to get back in time to do so at the 10 o'clock vote. I attach a copy of a recent pamphlet he wrote on the issue. I would be grateful if you could let me have your address in Mr Lilley's constituency.

I responded, holding off my dinner so that I might do so in a timely fashion:

It's a real shame he didn't make it to the vote on time. It's a question of priorities I guess.

As for my address I see no reason why it is necessary. Indeed, to remain anonymous seems to be a pre-requisite of political blogging these days. Most of us do not trust the state with sensitive information (hence our stand against ID cards) and, though you are in opposition, a general position of non-cooperation seems the order of the day.

However, if your request was based around the desire for me to prove that I am indeed a member of the constituency you should look no further than the list of invitees to a soon to happen "speak to your MP" house visit/dinner in Harpenden. I am on that list though I will not be attending.

I have also written Mr. Lilley numerous letters. Look to a letter of Peter's with a very terse response to one of my more polemic letters to him. I suspect it will be hard to see the woods for the trees.

I understand this is not absolute proof of anything, but it certainly has more of a provenance than the lies and half truths the government is feeding us about ID cards. If that's good enough for the House of Commons........

We feel very let down. Peter was too late to the vote. I would feel bad about that if I was an MP. I would certainly apologize rather than send a pamphlet.

(Blogged to 1952 committee members.)

Is this true?

On the Boris Johnson blog it says:

Tomorrow is the big vote: Second Reading of the ID Cards Bill at 9.30/10.00pm.

...

Boris has always been opposed to ID cards and now the Party are fully with him on this; and what with the Lib Dems on board and Labour's majority reduced the result should be tight.

Boris has, as far as I can tell, been against not only the government scheme but also against state imposed ID cards in general. Does and now the Party are fully with him on this mean that the Tories are against state imposed ID cards in principle or just against this particular Labour scheme?

We need to know.

I've received the following reply to my above posting from Melissa at Boris Johnson's office:

Thank you for your comment [trackback] on the Boris-Johnson.com site. Here is a reply to your question from Michael Howard's Office:

The Identity Cards Bill which the Government introduced to Parliament in the last session before the General Election would have established a national ID card scheme in the United Kingdom.

We have always judged the ID cards scheme by five tests: the purpose of the scheme; the technological capability available to Britain; the capability to manage the scheme; the cards’ value for money; and, most importantly, civil liberties – including the database and the security of the system. Adequate time should have been provided to debate these very important issues, but the Government did not allow it. It has failed to answer our five tests. Consequently, the Conservative Party does not support the ID Cards Bill recently re-introduced to the House of Commons by the Government.

So I guess there's no change then.

I think they are saying that an easily managed, technologically feasble, fully secure system using value for money cards where the aim is to identify people to the satisfaction of the government would get Tory support in the current political and social climate.

Well, at least I'm still a conservative.

Arrg, my eyes!

Make sure you are prepared before visiting Wonko's offering for the I keep my ID in my pants compaign.

It's not pretty.

Expect it on an advertising bill-board near you

Hahaha. The first user submitted graphic for the 1952 Committee I keep my ID in my pants campaign is this from Ian over at An English Shooters Blog.

Thanks Ian.

And from Gareth we have this image regarding biometric ID card scanning. WoW, if you see what I mean.

PRESS RELEASE: The 1952 Committee announces its campaign

BEGINS

The Star Chamber of the 1952 Committee is pleased to announce its first non-party aligned anti ID card initiative which is open to all opponents of the state’s ID card scheme regardless of party loyalty or party political apathy.

Introducing the “I keep my ID in my pants” campaign.

Many on the freedom loving side of the ID card debate cannot in good faith declare their intention to refuse to apply for an ID card as instructed to by the state and its agents if and when the ID card bill is passed as an act of Toad Hall in Westminster. The 1952 Committee recognise that there are a number of valid reasons for this stance by objectors to the scheme and, in its highly improbable remit as an all inclusive organisation, offers objectors this alternative.

To join this scheme all that’s required is that members declare the following intent:

When the occasion suits me, and when the opportunity arises, I will endeavour to carry my ID card in my pants. Whenever I am required to provide my ID card to an agent of the state, or to an agent of a private organisation cooperating with the state, I will without prejudice or delay reach into my pants, withdraw my card, and present it to the agent.

In recognition of the humanity of these anti freedom agents I will not deliberately make my card look skanky, deface my card with pants related artefacts or otherwise treat my card in any manner different from someone who carries their card on any other part of their body. I will simply carry it in my pants as is my right.

The state weaves an impressive lattice of legislation and it is quite possible that anti pant carrying law already exists. Whether it does or not is, as we all know, by-the-by as legislating against pant carrying requires a simple wave of the well used ban stick. Rest assured that we are determined to test any such discriminatory legislation to its fullest if and when the need arises.

ENDS

There will hopefully follow a number of campaign slogans and graphics which can be used to support this campaign.

To our readers in the USA. Over here in England pants means those undergarments worn under trousers (your pants) that act as a barrier between ones nether regions and said trousers (your pants).

Pants, in the context of this campaign, includes knickers, panties, boxers, jock straps and any other items that are considered to be in the spirit of the campaign.

1952 Committee - new member

I would like to welcome Ian from An English Shooter's Blog to the 1952 Committee.

There was also one other membership request a few weeks back but I've lost the details. If it was you, then please re-apply and accept my apologies.

1952 Committee - New members

Hard one to categorise this because, basically, it's an opposition party. Or part of one if you will. I'd like to welcome the Ex Tories at UKIP Bournemouth West to the Committee. I've given them membership in Spirit because, well, they're not bloggers for one thing. As I've said before, were inclusive round these parts.

Tragically that's more than I can say for the Tory party these days. More conservatism, less blah blah; that's my advice.

1952 Committee - new members

Two new members join the committee today. Dan, from Jackalope Pursuivant takes membership in spirit and Paul from Not Proud of Britain takes standard membership.

Conservatives yes, Tories no. Let's hope that the new Conservative Civil Liberties Group, which Tory MP Boris Johnson popped in on, actually has some influence. Yeah, I know, not with Howard banging away, but perhaps when he returns to his cellar.

New 1952 Committee members

A big welcome to the latest members of The 1952 Committee, Philip Chaston at Airstrip One and Jules at Attempting Escape.

1952 Committee: new member

A big welcome to Tim over at Right or Wrong who joins as an honourable member.

By the way, I have moved the list of members from the original blog post to the main page (hat tip to Scott).

Howard's scales

Last night I received an email from Anoneumouse over at The Anglo Saxon Chronicle which included a link to a reply that he has received from the Office of the Leader of the opposition regarding ID cards. You should read it but it basically says Michael Howard is a huge fan of ID cards and he thinks they will help us to exercise the freedom the government wishes us to enjoy. Hey, thanks for that.

Freedom and security are the watchwords of the Tory party, the letter says. But obviously these watchwords come with strings attached because it seems to me that Howard deals with these two principles as if they were two different sides of the same weighing scales. More security, less freedom. Less security, more freedom and ID cards are not the only measure of the man in this respect.

When he took away the private property of our countries sporting pistol shooters we saw his scales in operation again where freedom was the price that thousands had to pay for the security of all (that was effectively the line), though it is clear that in that particular transaction the security received was as ephemeral as many of us expected to be.

When I was being educated (not to a particularly high standard I am sure we can all agree) I managed to grasp a number of subjects only very loosely. There was a lot to do and I preferred some subjects over others. Mathematics, for instance, was a subject for which I received a passing grade through a very shallow understanding of methods, tricks , shortcuts and the like without actually grasping many of the fundamental principles behind the subject. It was a black box subject for me, and so it is with Michael Howard. The subject he has skimmed is freedom. In the old days he would have probably managed a C grade at O level.

Back then his careers advisor would have asked him if he had any interest in woodwork? These days this member of the 1952 Committee would ask pretty much the same question.

1952 Committee: New members

Two new members join today.

A warm welcome to Scott at Blithering Bunny and John at The Rottweiler Puppy.

Your biometric membership cards are in the post.

No, that was a joke.

New 1952 Committee member

A big welcome to Ian, over at Shades of Grey who has mailed in to join the Committee.

1952 Committee update: Bloggosphere reaches out to mainstream media

I note from Tim Worstall that Stephen Robinson in the Telegraph has decided to vote for someone other than the Tory party:

In selfish terms, I was relieved to see Michael Howard take the easy way out and endorse ID cards, because it freed me of any sense that I should have to vote for his party. No longer will I have to profess enthusiasm about Tory policies, or pretend that I see the green shoots of a Conservative revival.

For the first time I shall vote for the Liberal Democrats, because they do understand that the identity card debate is about the just role of government, and I suspect tens of thousands of instinctive Conservatives will do the same next year.

Tim suggests that:

It sounds like the 1952 Committee might have a new member. John? May I suggest that you drop an email to Mr Robinson and inform him of his opportunity? From past experience he does tend to respond.

I found this interesting opportunity was one that was too good to miss so I have sent the following mail to Mr. Robinson (via the general freedom@telegraph..... email address) on behalf of the Committee just to see what, if anything, happens:

Sir,

I have just read your article "Howard preferred ridicule to being thought soft on terror" at:

URL provided

...and noted that your vote will now be placed with the Liberal Democrats.

I wonder if you might consider joining the rest of us disaffected conservative voters by lending your support in spirit to an initiative we have just started as a group of bloggers called the 1952 Committee.

"The 1952 Committee was created when the Conservative party, under Michael Howard, backed the introduction of ID cards. For some conservative bloggers this was the final straw and many of them started to declare on their blogs that they would not be voting Tory at the next election. I began collecting and listing these declarations under the 1952 Committee heading chosen because it was the year in which Winston Churchill abandoned ID cards in post war Britain."

Though the committee was set up for bloggers, I am sure that members of the mainstream media who are sympathetic would be given a warm welcome.

A summary page can be found here:

http://www.theenglandproject.net/1952committee.html

Faithfully,

New 1952 Committee member

Tim Worstall has joined the 1952 Committee:

Oh, and add me to the list of course. I’m in the process of registering at present for an absentee ballot...I can’t bring myself to vote for the odious Don Foster but shall find some other non-Tory non-Labour party to vote for, deciding closer to the time when I see what the list of options is like.

By the way, I've decided that Committee headquarters look remarkably like the inside of a rather nice pub. More than one open fire, free cigars and no TV sets.

The guest beer is Shepherd Neame Vintage Christmas Ale.

Here's a report from the Scotsman on last night's shenanigans in the Commons. You know, in the old days abstaining from a vote in most forums meant hhmm, well, you know, I'm not really sure either way. These days I have no idea what it means.

1952 Committee receives letter from Brussels

Ahem. It seems that our '52 press release the other day has fallen foul of some EU regulations. In it we alluded to our made up articles of association which, for some reason allowed us to sell fish.

Gawain from Brussels writes:

My dear I would like to ask what genus of fish can be purchased from the 1952 Committee? It is also important for me to know where it was landed, whether it has been hygienically kept, and whether the trawler that made the catch had regulation net size.

You just wait until he finds out we sell in pounds and ounces.

New 1952 Committee members

Since the last announcement we have had another nine members join the 1952 Committee. A big warm welcome to:

Anoneumouse at The Anglo Saxon Chronicle.
Ken at Militant Moderate.
Paul at Voice of the Future.

Tim at An Englishman's Castle (Hon).
Neil at German for Beginners (Hon).
Lurch at Gun Culture (Hon).
Dominic at Serenade (Hon).
Phil at LimeyPundit (Hon).

Wolfie at Dodgeblogium (Spirit).

I have added a stand alone document for the committee. It can be found here and I have linked my 1952 Committee sidebar image to it.

Also, David at Stupid White Men has become a member.

PRESS RELEASE - New members of the 1952 Committee

Immediate release.

Two new conservative leaning bloggers have joined The 1952 Committee. A great big look, see what you've gone and done now Michael welcome to Giles at JacobsRoom and Drake at The Edge of England's Sword (Hon).

We have also received a number of emails in support from conservative minded people who do not write for a weblog. Unfortunately, and at this time, we feel we cannot offer associate membership to the committee for non-sitting members as our articles of association* do not allow it. However, we would like to thank you for your kind support in these troubling times.

ENDS

If you have any queries regarding the 1952 Committee or would like further information on a news item please contact the Committee Press Office via the Internet using the email address at the top and to the left of this page.

* Although the articles do allow us to sell fish for some reason.

The nothing party

The unrecognisable Tory party are backing ID cards. They are dead.

Stop all the clocks, cut off the telephone,
Prevent the dog from barking with a juicy bone,
Silence the pianos and with muffled drum
Bring out the coffin, let the mourners come.

Let aeroplanes circle moaning overhead
Scribbling on the sky the message He Is Dead,
Put crepe bows round the white necks of the public doves,
Let the traffic policemen wear black cotton gloves.

He was my North, my South, my East and West,
My working week and my Sunday rest,
My noon, my midnight, my talk, my song;
I thought that love would last for ever: I was wrong.

The stars are not wanted now: put out every one;
Pack up the moon and dismantle the sun;
Pour away the ocean and sweep up the wood.
For nothing now can ever come to any good.

W. H. Auden

I'm going to try and keep track of previously pro-Tory bloggers who have decided not to vote Tory because of their support for ID cards (see the end of this post). If you are one or know of any please email me (email in CONTACT box on top left of page). Because any such list demands a name I'm calling it The 1952 Committee. I believe that this was the year in which the Churchill government ended post war ID cards (name subject to change if I got the year wrong).

Honorary positions are available to historically pro-Tory bloggers who had already made their minds up to not vote Tory because of other issues but who could not again support the party on the basis of their stance on ID cards. For example, a tougher line on EUrope by the Tories would not be enough to make up for their support of ID cards.

Ahem, (Spirit) is for bloggers who, if they did everything necessary to enable them to vote, would turn up at a polling station just so they could decide not to vote Tory. I know, I know, but we like to be inclusive.

Also, comments open for the second time only on The England Project. Because we care.

Received this mail from David at The Cabarfeidh Pages which shows the depth of feeling over this and other Tory failures:

Member of the Scottish Conservatives Executive Council here in Moray, former Treasurer until last month (quit as I'm now doing teacher training). Had enough. Howard has ignored what I and many others have told him. If he won't listen to the paid up members and office bearers? Twit.

I'm attending my last AGM on Thursday and quitting thereafter. Can't force myself to vote LibDem but if I don't vote then Labour will stay in change this country for the worst.

For this I served 23 years and ended up 80% disabled thanks to the IRA?

From guest blogger Steve Bowbrick over at Honourable Fiend:

Did Michael Howard really just throw away the opportunity to create a robust, distinctive, small 'l' liberal, modern, pro-liberty, anti-Big Government, anti-waste policy on ID cards and, instead, opt to meekly shadow Blunkett, Blair et al through the next decade of epic waste, technological dead-ends and constitutional vandalism on the road to universal, compulsory biometric ID? Looks like it. Did he, while he was at it, open a giant rift in his shadow cabinet and produce the kind of tension that can only lead to the next leadership challenge? Maybe.

Andrew is:

...sick of this. Howard is a serial headline-hunter. He manages the party on a day to day basis, with no discernable long-term strategy, and a distinct lack of common principles. I personally can't stomach that any longer.

---

The 1952 Committee members list can be found here.

---

Images are always fun.

If you want to link them to something you might want to consider this.