Davis steps up opposition to ID cards in "high crime" Britain

The European Crime and Safety Survey has again labelled Britain a "high crime" country, with the highest levels of burglary and assault in the EU. David Davis responded:

"This survey shows that by any measure we are doing badly in comparison to the rest of Europe. Despite the Government's protestations, it is clear that ten years of failure have left the British public more at risk from both property crime and violent crime than any other comparable country in Europe."

On a related issue, Davis has today written an open letter to Sir Gus O'Donnell, the Cabinet Secretary, giving formal notice that an incoming Conservative Government would scrap ID cards. He enquired if any provisions had been made:

"in the relevant contractual arrangements to protect the Government - and public funds - against the costs that would be incurred as a result of early cancellation of the scheme."

Ahead of the Party launching campaign against ID cards tomorrow, Davis is basically arguing that the Government should think twice about the scheme because the Conservatives would scrap it in a few years anyway.

Deputy Editor

Comments

[Richard]

We might have more people locked up than anywhere else in Europe but as a proportion of criminals we're further down the league. We need to build more prisons and arrest more criminals. But where will the money come from?

[Arthurian Legend]

This weekend I watched the 18 Doughty Street interviw with the excellent near-namesake of the shadow home secretary, David Davies.

His line was more "handcuff a hoodie" than hug one; a recommendation which Davies has himself commendably acted upon. Some politicians ask you to do as they say, Davies does as he says!

As to ID cards, David Davis's stance is principled and correct and I am pleased that he is acting upon his earlier pledge to maintain our historic liberties.

These are two politicians of genuine credit to the Conservative Party.

[Louise]

To me this is what "Liberal Conservatism" actually is in practice. When people act outside of the law, they should be punished to the fullest extent - the rest of us should be left to our lives and liberties.

[Peter Hatchet]

Davis is a legend. On every issue, he's all over it like a rash.

He'd be a fantastic home secretary. He'd get a good balance (despite the rhetoric) on Liberalism/Authoritarianism. He'd also lick the department into shape.

Easily the most visible - and effective - member of the shadow cabinet at the moment after Cameron.

[Dave Bartlett]

David Davis is a Good Egg.

[Graeme Archer]

David Davis is a brilliant egg (hard boiled?) and this is a fantastic move. Lest, though, it's seen as a DD v DC issue, every time I've heard DC address a meeting of the faithful he has mainlined on such a commitment (to huge applause). Louise is spot on - this is liberal conservatism, the opposite of the ineffective authoritarianism of this discredited government. It's brilliant to see us leading on an issue that would have had LibDem pawprints all over it by election time had we stayed silent.

[Mark McCartney]

Good to see the Party doing something worthwhile for once.

And of course it's coming from David Davis -the man who ought to be leader - not from Cameron.

>>Easily the most visible - and effective - member of the shadow cabinet at the moment after Cameron<<

Don't you mean "after Cameron gets out of the way"

[Bishop Hill]

Could someone with contacts in the Party please get DD to confirm that this means both the cards AND the database which sits behind it. Just so we're sure.

[ToMTom]

We need to build more prisons and arrest more criminals. But where will the money come from?

Posted by: Richard | February 05, 2007 at 17:16

Restitution Order against the miscreant with his assets and his family's benefits docked and his prison pay to pay some proportion as restitution and the victims having some input into any parole

[TomTom]

and having my occasional gripes against the Archbishop of York I wish to say how pleased I am at his comments today and his credibility in contrast to that other Archbishop

[Tam Large]

Good news and about time. When ID cards were discussed before, the Conservative Party only opposed them on cost, not in principle. Of course they are offensive, reek of police-statism, and all conservatives should oppose them instinctively. This seems pretty uniequivocal from Davis.

[Tam Large]

Good news and about time. When ID cards were discussed before, the Conservative Party only opposed them on cost, not in principle. Of course they are offensive, reek of police-statism, and all conservatives should oppose them instinctively. This seems pretty uniequivocal from Davis.

[John Moss]

A prison.

80 rooms, one canteen, six classrooms, one gym, one lounge, one exercise yard.

Otherwise known as a budget hotel with a big fence round it.

There should be one in every town, so family can visit, tucked round the back of an industrial estate so there are no neighbours to complain.

Budget: £30,000 per room (That's what T-Lodge pay), say add £50k for the extra locks and the fence. £2.5m the lot.

Order 100 at the same time, get an extra 25% out of it because of economies of scale and your 10,000 extra prison places have cost you £250m all in.

Factor in Government incompetenace so the total cost will be half a billion.

Annual Home Office capital budget £1.16bn.

[Peter Hatchet]

"Don't you mean "after Cameron gets out of the way" "

No, I don't Mark.

I think Cameron is doing an excellent job.

Reasonable, constructive, criticism of his performance is fine. Suggestions for improvement are welcome. But, usually, I don't see that on this site.

All I see is sniping, disloyalty and bitterness. Not the way to support our party, nor the way to win an election.

[gingeral]

DD will never be leader now (I actually think he would have been a fine PM but a mediocre Leader of the Opposition). But he'll make an excellent Home Secretary.

[Anoneumouse]

With regards to contractual arrangements on ID cards, perhaps David Davis needs to read a copy of the EC Convention on the Law Applicable to Contractual Obligations

Article 17 - No retrospective effect.

[Cllr Keith Standring]

I am delighted with this firm statement committing the next Conservative Government to scrap ID cards. I posted an article on 'Your Platform' saying 'No to ID Cards'. It received considerable support. How good it is to have a leading Conservative spokesman standing firm on such an important issue.

[Perdix]

Anoneumuse 23.35 - why don't you go back to your own ukipper site - this is not about the EU nor about retrospective effects. DD is warning the government and contractors to make provision so that retrospective actions will be unecessary. (Saw you post the same rubbish on Ian Dale's site. I feel sorry (not!)that you have so few political posters on your site that you have to infect other sites).

[Patsy Sergeant]

I agree with all the other positive posters that this is really good news, and lets hope that the database behind it is scrapped as well. It would be reassuring to believe that anybody with enough money wasn't able to go to this database to get facts on ordinary people.

[blin]

Something certain to unite us all!
the legacy: a comedy of terrors
A gripping new E-novel that charts the consequences of unbridled governance, as the ridiculous becomes sublime.
Free to view. Please use recycled paper.
www.myspace.com/thelegacyacomedyofterrors
Please support E-publishing -it's the greenest way.

[jorgen]

blin, please try again. I get "Invalid Friend ID. This user has either cancelled their membership, or their acccount has been deleted." :(

[realcon]

Can someone explain in simple terms please - would a Conservative government be able to drop ID contracts already running without massive compensation from the taxpayer?

[Denis Cooper]

Depends on the terms of the contract, obviously, EU rules or no EU rules.

Or so it should, normally, because otherwise any company doing business with the British government could find that their properly negotiated contract had been arbitrarily amended or cancelled after an election, which would in general be an injustice to that company even if the British government should never have made the contract in the first place. On the other hand contracts between the British government and the governments of other sovereign states - treaties - are not necessarily in the same category as contracts with private companies.