NO2ID

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/6209163.stm


Blair plan for 'people's panels'

Unhealthy lifestyles may be on the panels' agenda
The prime minister has called for "people's panels" to help push through key public service reforms.
Tony Blair says the panels will be made up of members of the public who will be asked to advise ministers on the most difficult areas of policy.

The panels will discuss issues such as government plans to influence lifestyles and healthy living.

It will also look at using supermarket loyalty card technology to see how people use public services.

'Radical solutions'

One of Mr Blair's aides said the "major extension" in public engagement would go some way to providing a "crucial routemap to the future".

He said: "It recognises that politics is changing, the public level of expectations is rising both in terms of the provision which they receive and the right which they have to influence those services.

"This engagement process will identify in more detail the areas which the public want us to focus on and develop a series of radical and progressive solutions," he added.

The consultation will begin with 100 members of the public recruited early in 2007 to take part in the panels.

In February, regional meetings will be held where members will read versions of Whitehall briefing papers presented to ministers.


Mr Blair is seeking public input on social issues

All 100 panel members will take part in a "summit" a month later, which will also be attended by junior ministers and civil servants.

The panel is expected to look at three areas in particular, Downing Street has said.

They will discuss what "support and encouragement" the state can give to help to improve people's "life chances and well-being" - in particular such as "behavioural factors" as smoking and poor diet.

They will look at how retailers, such as supermarket giant Tesco, use loyalty cards to create databases of their clients and tailor-make services for them based on the information gathered.

The panels will also look at how contracts can be extended between members of the public and the state - similar to the way youngsters receive allowances if they stay in education.

This is all window dressing for Blair to appear as if he his doing something until he reaches 10 years as PM then retires with an increase in his pension of £20,000 a year.

He is a spent force, a lame duck and hounded by Scotland Yard.

Nothing will come of these peoples panels.

Quite!

I wonder how one gets to be on the panel. Rob - I'll nominate you if you like!

Then again, to be a panel member you'll have to be CRB checked and no doubt will already have to be a pillock of society.

I expect the panel will consist of busy-body local councillors and members of assorted quangos. They won't just pick people at random off the street. The panel will consist of just those types of people who already want to micro-manage our lives. Oh, yes, and there'll be a white man, a black man, a white woman, a black woman, a lesbian, etc....... a PC panel.

Blair Democracy.


The consultation will begin with 100 members of the public recruited early in 2007 to take part in the panels.
= selected on their ability to reflect the greatest suckers of society.

In February, regional meetings will be held where members will read versions of Whitehall briefing papers presented to ministers.
= consume vast amounts of NLP and other brainwashing.


"This engagement process will identify in more detail the areas which the public want us to focus on and develop a series of radical and progressive solutions," he added.
= use focus groups, delphi technique & group psychology to achieve desired consensus.

Mr Blair is seeking public input on social issues
= Socialism

They will discuss what "support and encouragement" the state can give to help to improve people's "life chances and well-being" - in particular such as "behavioural factors" as smoking and poor diet.
= compliance to the programme

I suppose Blairs Panel will not allow fatties, or dirty filthy smokers, or alcoholics.

It would be great if the panel could assess all the MPs and look at their short comings in detail.

How many bars do they have in Parliament?

How many smoke to excess?

How many have a politically incorrect BMI (body mass index)?

They could have a mass weigh in of MPs and name and shame them.

Hi all,

It would appear every database going, seems fair game for our glorious leader. No doubt he will be writing to persons who buy large sized cloths and persons who spend a lot on cream cakes and crisps.

We have recently witnessed peoples data been used against them, to refuse them access to certain medical treatments. One PCT banned 'hip and joint replacements', for obese patients. Nationally obese people are now refused fertility treatment.

I would never go on the scales in a doctors surgery, not because I am overweight, on the principle my weight is my private business.

A number of years ago I ditched all loyalty and club cards, even though it mean't losing out on some promotions. I pay in cash whenever shopping so my privacy isn't interferred with.

I do like to consume more alcohol than advised, so thats me of the panel.

Cheers all, hic hic.

"Fatty Soames" the Tory MP relation to Churchill did say once that homeless people were those one stepped over when leaving the theatre.

So I suppose this self indulgent Tory half wit will not allow his health to suffer by being stepped over by the NHS and will merely go private.

Also John Prescott had to go to hospital recently and under his governments health proposals would have been denied access until he had lost at least 5 stones in weight.

I agree the panels will come to nil, they're in no way going to be representative of anything except what the govt told them to say.

The point is that they're to be used as a cover for so-called proposals by 'Joe Public' to put out the notion of extending the state-citizen 'contract' - i.e. do as we bid or it'll go on file (using Tesco tech) and you'll be denied the services you've paid tax for, plus a whole lot besides, as and when we come to think of it. Because if the panel of 100 Joes thought of it (like any rigged poll) then obviously it reflects public opinion, and who are we, elected govt, to say no?

Mmmm yes... remember the so-called people's peers?

Turns out the people were all well-to-do, connected and far from ordinary representatives of the people. I fear the same thing will happen here.

I can save Blair 100 free cups of tea and 20 packets of Hobnobs... most people really don't want the Government 'providing more services' or 'a series of radical solutions'. We want the Government to help those that can't help themselves and then to stay out of everything else. Simple.

Some times I wanter if they are a bunch of poofs.

"Blair plan for 'people's panels'" Please do tell me why the government and Mr Blair are the most important people in the world Mr BBc journalist. Now do please tell. Why should we possibly need the government to meddle in every little detail of our lived, rob us blind and f off with our freedom?

doest that mean that the goverment has just asmuch influence over you as it does oover anyone else, concidering you react and change your lifestyle based on what the goverment says, surely if you acturly did have a mind of your own you would beable to live your life without looking to the goverment to direct you positivley or negitavly, not everything thay say is good will be bad for you, all they care about it whats good for them, and very occasionaly that will coincide with whats good for the people... and i would say living a healthy life style would be one of those things, listening to nicotines corupting influence over your body insted of your bodys feeling of being weak and sickly that you'll feel the rest of the time when your not smoking would be an example. who is more evil the ciggerette company or the goverment, im betting there really isent much in it.

Robert Boyle,

The thing that strikes me is how profoundly undemocratic such a move transparently is.

To elevate a (handpicked) focus group to the status of 'policy advisors' shows (a) just how out of touch this government really is, and (b) how desperate it is to create the impression that it is trying to engage ('the Big Conversation', 'Labourspace', etc.)

If the other Parliamentary parties fail to hammer Blair on this, they are seriously missing a trick.

And anyone who favours a referendum-driven approach to policy could also make some serious ground...

From a voluntaryist point of view I think referendums are certainly a step in the right direction. Take for example the wars 'Britain' has engaged under the Blair government and there has been clear opposition of a vast majority of the population. I have yet to meet anyone who supported these actions.

As for this here cattle index. If you ask a dozen people if they would support the use of fines or other civil penalties and the collection of those with the use of baliff thugs I think not one would support the imposition. No, no one in their right minds would want for friends of theirs to be subjected to such backwards and agressive action.

The cattle 'card' index is a most pathetic sceme to rain in the robotic slaves. It lacks any kind of human descency and respect. Trusting and good people all over these islands would be hurded up to the "interview" centres to register themselves in an open prison.

It is time that we as a people respected one anothers self-ownership and refused to give up our sovereignty to the government or to allow the sovereignty of our friends to be degraded. We have a right to a free market in identity, privacy and security services and a right to choose on a voluntary basis which services and actions to take to manage our identities. The government has no right to impose cattle 'cards' and no right to require it's proof of ID for monopolised services or to monopolise the provision of services.

With ID Cards and the database state we have the definitive use of technology by the state. Using databases in this way sets the whole tone for how technology will be perceived and valued by the population and represents the state seizing control over the direction to which future technological development will go. It is the government's answer to the internet. An identity database is their internet. The internet itself is a use of technology that has little benefit to the state and fare too much to us. NIR moves the balance back in their favour.

They have watched the way in which the internet has empowered people and seen the immense power for true democratisation it represents and they don't like it a bit as it threatens their continued hold on power. They know also that it threatens to undermine the structure of the economy in a way that would suit most people but disadvantage them.

They know also that the arguments for the internet to be used as the centre of the democratic process are ultimately irresistible. These arguments would provide for referenda of all kinds and ultimately for a far more democratic electoral process that would inevitably be based on proportional representation leading to the end of oppositional politics and even the end of party politics as we know it. They, of course, are not going to be the ones who advocate such innovation as it would end their status quo. Instead, they go in the opposite direction and create the climate of fear and insecurity that suits them best, under cover of which they turn away from the potential democratic benefits of the new technology and lead us into a security lockdown nightmare. They know that, though such a system as the NIR will never work as claimed, it will produce fear and insecurity and also will lead people away from seeing what positive options we could be creating instead. Ultimately, if they hold onto their status quo through the coming years of continuing technological innovation, it can only mean that the NIR is working.

Right now, instead of seeing the development of the ID Card nightmare, we should be welcoming the first steps towards a new democracy that genuinely involves everyone, rewards everyone and gives everyone their own sense of political power and influence. This would start with serious online debates and lead to online referenda. The need for the artificial time-period of 5 years for a government (which they manipulate to their advantage) would go, and in would come the ability, qualified by certain protections, to oust MPs and even the PM if they were not seen to be serving the people. All this would have to be set against a growing sense of the importance of educating the population in history.

Fantasy? The only real solution to the deterioration of government and the destruction of society. Also, the ultimate and complete reversal of the current desire of the state to abuse us with technological power. Until the time that we regain the upper hand over our own elected representatives then everything else is just abuse of technological power.

Online voting was mentioned in the queens speech this christmas and there is a good chance that they may suggest online voting as a sweetener for this ID scheme and as a ploy to control the internet. The internet is not a democracy. It is an anarchy and that is why it is so good. Democracy per say suggests a right to rule by the majority when no such right exists. Democracy in all its forms tramples on the individual rights of those governed and can often be as bad as a dictatorship and can easily become one as occured in Nazi Germany. It would be so easy to fix an online referendum and ofcourse only the polls that the government were likely to win would be offered. The only civilized and humane way to live our lives is thru voluntary agreement, finding compromises and fully respecting the individual rights of the sovereign-human-beings that make up society. There is no need for an external 'authority' to impose it's will on people and certainly no need to destory the internet inorder to institute online political scams.

I have often wondered whether the Internet could one day virtually replace the government. Instead of everyone voting on everything they only need people to vote on issues they feel they want to influence. Every policy could have a vote attached to it and even policies could be nominated via the net.

I recall how ICANN had its leader voted in through the Internet and people voted this highly intelligent techy who was popular in the circles of people who were involved with Internet engineering issues. Big business frowned on the idea this guy got through, the UN wanted to seize control but the people who used the Internet appeared to be quite happy for it to be in the care of the American government on account of the fact the American government instituted the most transparent structure it could muster.

It was a smart move when Big Brother UN started to move in and they are still wresteling for control. I have always said Tim Berneers Lee will in the end prove to be the greatest revolutionary. He is furiously fighting to keep the net free from political interference and doing a fine job as well.

Both are ideals, of course. Parts of the internet are anarchistic, but others are rigidly controlled. What we need for human life to flourish is imagination and balance, not anarchy or democracy.

I believe that the internet as presently constituted offers a better model for the future of governance than any alternative. If ID Cards are 'successfully' imposed on us then the next step may well be to regulate use of the internet in a way that suits the global government elites. Moves towards that are already afoot. I don't really think that the government is going to continue allowing us to benefit from the fruits of the new technology much longer more or less unchecked. I suspect one of the reasons we are seeing Nu Labor becoming increasingly authoritarian and intrusive is because they fear otherwise being seen to be irrelevant compared to the social transforming powers of the internet. ID Cards are there to let us know who is boss in a world where technology might otherwise begin to naturally displace some functions of government. Another way to view this is to see that the paternalistic government feels impotent in the face of 'the children' knowing more about IT than it does itself. It has to prove itself by doing something impressive: ID Cards.

I've been to a couple of these Labour 'Let's Talk' gigs, they're hilarious, one I went to was with Gordon Brown. Room full of people at tables, some local councillor gives out a random set of 'questions' about what we think of education. While we discuss these, G Brown comes in, gives a 10 min speech outlining his vision for World War IV in Africa, then comes round and gladhands us all with lots of photos before leaving.
Sort of hilarious, anyway. Actually it was more weird than funny.

On Labour's Tescoification of the UK, there's a speech from teh Manchester conference on the Labour party website, www.labour.org.uk, look up speeches,
called 'as they say, 'every little helps'.
Also look up one by John Reid called 'liberty, security and resilience' given in October. It's chilling.

He had a similar scheme with the Muslims, until they saw it for what it was - lipservice. It also smacks of the 'Big Conversation'. Remember that?

Peoples panel? Yeah, right.

Let's Talk
Big Conversation
There's a debate going on teh Labour website about renewing democracy in this country. !!! How did such a thing need ever arise???

Peoples panels eh. What's the betting they'll be stuff full of Countryside Alliance types within six months.

Returning to the subject of selfish fatties hogging all the NHS resources the Irish Mail kindly printed a picture of Tony in Spain displaying a wonderful set of moobs (male boobs apparently). I didn't know which to reach for first, the sick bag or the running shoes.

Justin.

You've missed the point, Justin. "Deliberative exercises" are not self-selected by the best organised or most fanatical, as participative democracies and web-polls are. They are controlled by those who commission them and work with the conceptual framework that they impose.

To parody only slightly: a people's panel on ID cards would be asked to consider things such as, "Exactly how great an idea is national identity management, and how can it be extended to bring more benefits to the citizen and the nation?" on the basis of seeing powerpoint presentations from 'eGovernment experts' from the Cabinet Ofiice, Intellect, and the IPPR, with 'for balance' a package containing a transcript of the more paranoid clips from Henry Porter's rather vague programme, and that scruffy little green Liberty booklet.

Point taken but there're eveywhere, from the House of Lords, nay, the Royal family down!

Justin.

No it wasn't. Where do the people who come on this forum get their ideas from? Half of the assertions we get here, both pro and anti are completely made up.

The Queen's Speech 2006
http://www.number-10.gov.uk/output/Page10419.asp

The Queen's Christmas Message
http://www.royal.gov.uk/output/Page5718.asp

It is very suttle but I think you will find voting is mentioned by the man in red in front of the computer.

queen: "considerate and active citizens. And there is another cause for hope, that we can do better in the future at bridging the generation gap.

Man in red "If you want to vote you have to sign in and then you have to put you name on and your date of bith... "
http://www.theroyalist.net/content/view/1573/1/

You should check your facts before accusing people of making things up.