Tuesday, 7 July 2009

Show me Your I.D.!

Although the government has been forced to backtrack on the issue of introducing Identity Cards, the pilot scheme covering the entire N.W. region of England is going ahead. Furthermore, the issue of ID cards to people in the North-West is voluntary. When the Conservatives are elected into government next year they will not introduce this costly and unnecessary scheme, so why is the Labour government wasting more public money on a pilot scheme when ID cards will not be introduced by either party in power?


Now read this......

Cost of passport set to increase
21 mins ago

Holidaymakers face inflation-busting increases in passport fees.

Fewer people are going abroad as families tighten their belts in the recession, meaning applications for passports were 400,000 below the expected level.

The rises, which will come in to force in September, will see the price of a child passport increase £3 to £49.

Fast-track adult applications, which take a week, will cost 15% more, up £15.50 to £112.50.

Prices have shot up in the last decade. In 1997 a passport cost £18. In 2007 it cost £51 and by last year it was £72.

The cost increases are in part due to the inclusion of biometric technology to improve security.

A Home Office spokesman denied the increase was related to ID cards.

But shadow home Secretary, Chris Grayling, said: "This looks like a blatant attempt to bury part of the cost of the ID scheme in the price of a passport. The Government admits that it has no idea how many people will have to volunteer for ID cards before they cover their costs, so it looks like the cost is being lumped on to our passports."

Immigration Minister Phil Woolas said British passports were a "gold standard" in identity documents. "Since the last fee increase in 2007 the Identity and Passport Service has issued almost eight million first generation ePassports, containing secure chips holding an individual's passport details and facial biometric."

1 comment:

kerdasi amaq said...

I.D. cards ought to be free. If the government is to insist that people have to have them, why should ordinary people bear the expense of acquiring them? They pay enough in taxes to the government as it is!