It's official: the police do not know what ID cards are for
During this morning’s Plenary Session of the London Assembly (attended by both our members – so no jibes please about people taking the money and not doing any work), the discussion was about plans for the aftermath of a major terrorist attack on London.
Since, apparently, none of the witnesses questioned will be in charge of any aspect of those plans, it seemed rather a waste of time but, one presumes that people who really are working on contingency plans are not going to be questioned about them half-way through their labours by not very knowledgeable politicos, eager to score points with the media.
Nevertheless, even though we say so ourselves, the most interesting question was asked by Damian Hockney, leader of the UKIP group in the Assembly. In fact, that was the one question the business managers for the plenary session were worried about as it might have political implications. Actually, they seem rather worried about Mr Hockney’s activities. UKIP is beginning to be known as the group that is likely to ask difficult to answer questions. Some might argue that this is precisely what members of an elected assembly are for, but it seems that the idea is rather novel and radical in the Glass Egg.
Mr Hockney asked Commander Mick Messinger of the Metropolitan Police (or MPS, as they like to be called in this age of cuddly abbreviations) whether, in his opinion, internal passports, a.k.a. ID cards were of any use in the prevention of terrorist attacks.
Commander Messinger did not seem to think that they would be of any real use, though he did think that there were certain benefits to these cards from the policing point of view. There were, also, certain disbenefits, he opined. He did not give any details of either.
It seems that these cards would be quite useful for identifying people (duh!), particularly those who had collapsed in the streets. As prior to a terrorist attack the number of people who collapse in the streets is not very large and are unlikely to be terrorists, this seems to be a very expensive way of dealing with a problem for which there are already ample provisions in the ambulance service.
One cannot help feeling that this is seriously unimaginative. After all, if we are talking about vulnerable people for whom ID cards (as our internal passports will be known) might be useful, what about those who had forgotten their keys? Can they use their cards to break into their homes? Not, presumably, if they have mortice or Banham locks. Could particularly absent-minded people use their ID cards to identify themselves to themselves? Will they remember to carry them? Perhaps, like evacuated children, they should have those cards tied to their coats.
Cars. Could they be used to open cars with keys locked inside? On present record the police would not notice anybody trying to break into a car using unauthorized tools, such as an ID card.
The one thing they cannot be used for is preventing any major or, even, minor terrorist attacks. Or so the police seems to think.
Since, apparently, none of the witnesses questioned will be in charge of any aspect of those plans, it seemed rather a waste of time but, one presumes that people who really are working on contingency plans are not going to be questioned about them half-way through their labours by not very knowledgeable politicos, eager to score points with the media.
Nevertheless, even though we say so ourselves, the most interesting question was asked by Damian Hockney, leader of the UKIP group in the Assembly. In fact, that was the one question the business managers for the plenary session were worried about as it might have political implications. Actually, they seem rather worried about Mr Hockney’s activities. UKIP is beginning to be known as the group that is likely to ask difficult to answer questions. Some might argue that this is precisely what members of an elected assembly are for, but it seems that the idea is rather novel and radical in the Glass Egg.
Mr Hockney asked Commander Mick Messinger of the Metropolitan Police (or MPS, as they like to be called in this age of cuddly abbreviations) whether, in his opinion, internal passports, a.k.a. ID cards were of any use in the prevention of terrorist attacks.
Commander Messinger did not seem to think that they would be of any real use, though he did think that there were certain benefits to these cards from the policing point of view. There were, also, certain disbenefits, he opined. He did not give any details of either.
It seems that these cards would be quite useful for identifying people (duh!), particularly those who had collapsed in the streets. As prior to a terrorist attack the number of people who collapse in the streets is not very large and are unlikely to be terrorists, this seems to be a very expensive way of dealing with a problem for which there are already ample provisions in the ambulance service.
One cannot help feeling that this is seriously unimaginative. After all, if we are talking about vulnerable people for whom ID cards (as our internal passports will be known) might be useful, what about those who had forgotten their keys? Can they use their cards to break into their homes? Not, presumably, if they have mortice or Banham locks. Could particularly absent-minded people use their ID cards to identify themselves to themselves? Will they remember to carry them? Perhaps, like evacuated children, they should have those cards tied to their coats.
Cars. Could they be used to open cars with keys locked inside? On present record the police would not notice anybody trying to break into a car using unauthorized tools, such as an ID card.
The one thing they cannot be used for is preventing any major or, even, minor terrorist attacks. Or so the police seems to think.
posted by Helen at 5:13 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home