The Debatable Land

New Labour's continuing Big Brother obsession

Words fail me:

In 20 years time, I suspect that the National Identity Scheme [ie, compulsory Identity Cards] will be just a normal part of British life – another great British institution without which modern life, whatever it looks like in 2020, would be quite unthinkable.

So says Liam Byrne MP, Minister of State for Citizenship, Immigration and Nationality. Determined to establish his bona fides as a comedian, Mr Byrne also would have us believe that:

Like the railways in the 19th century and the national grid in the 20th century, I think there are strong arguments for thinking of the National Identity System as a modern day public good - that very quickly becomes part and parcel of everyday life in Britain.

And he's not done there either. This statement might also cause the odd eyebrow to be raised:

My party has always been suspicious of growth in unregulated and unaccountable power and the risk of new inequalities.

This is, naturally, just another example of the government's belief that we must destroy our way of life to defend it. Once again, it used to be the case that Britons were proud that whereas foreigners were expected to carry identity cards in their own country, Britons were under no such obligation to do so in ours.

Equally naturally, this is justified in the name of security [nb: if it's not for the kids it's always for security], though Northern Ireland's unhappy experience might, you'd think, provide some evidence that identity papers are not a particularly important or useful counter-terrorist measure.

Hat tip: Mr Eugenides

Free Scooter?

The parade of conservatives demanding that Scooter Libby be treated leniently because he's a dashed good egg is, well, nauseating even if one may think that the entire Valerie Plame investigation and Libby's subsequent trial was, generally speaking, an unseemly brouhaha.

Rod Dreher reminds one of the essential point here:

Why is it that so many conservatives who were so clear about the need for even the president of the United States to be subject to the rule of law re: lying under oath in a criminal investigation (when it was Bill Clinton) are now filled with consideration and pity for a Republican who has done the same thing? What kind of message does this send about conservatives' dedication to principle? Or does the rule of law only apply to unlettered vulgarians?

Brown Confirms Prime Ministerial Credentials

Well that didn't take long.

Gordon Brown has rejected calls to block a controversial move by MPs to get out of freedom of information laws.

MPs pushed the plan closer to becoming law earlier in what critics called a "shameful day for Parliament".

More bang for your buck

Free-marketeers outwit government: Cocaine prices are down and purity is up.

Next Wednesday, President Alvaro Uribe is set to meet with U.S. President George W. Bush at the White House to discuss U.S. support for Plan Colombia, the anti-narcotics and counterinsurgent program that has cost American taxpayers more than US$4 billion since 2000.

U.S. officials have insisted that Plan Colombia is reducing the quality and availability of cocaine on U.S. streets.

A Wolf in Fool's Clothing

I was going to write something about Naomi Wolf's unintentionally hilarious piece about the fascist tide sweeping America - "Fascist America, In 10 Easy Steps" (it's just like a diet or growing roses, you know. Easy when you follow these simple rules) -  but Norm Geras has saved me the trouble of doing so. He's a bit more restrained and laconic than I might have been, mind you...

Tall tales and fishy excuses

Say it ain't so, Megan! Actually, you're not at all mistaken to think that:

Occasionally making up stories in bars... and claiming to be allergic to food that you merely despise, are very common things

I think I've more or less retired from the former. After all, there comes a time in any man's life when the realisation drops that he's just not fit to compete with the 5th Earl of Ickenham. But I often pretend to be allergic to any foodstuff that lives in water simply because I despise the taste of all fish.

in this spirit of sharing, perhaps readers will divulge the lies they tell so as to avoid embarrassing their dinner hosts. Much better, after all, to suggest that one is allergic to their lovingly prepared feast than to insult them be refusing, point blank, to eat it. The Allergy Manoeuvre allows both parties to retire form the field with their honour intact.

I fear, mind you, that this is so, so true:

A sorrow shared may be halved, and a joy shared doubled, but a humiliation shared is at least cubed.