Fellow Daily Sceptic readers may remember that the Government intends to extend the use of digital identity verification across additional departments as part of its ‘digital transformation’ programme.
The Cabinet Office ran a public consultation on these developments in January-March this year. The results of that consultation have now been published, together with the wider Government response, and include some points of note. The figures and percentages used below are taken directly from the Government’s report.
The consultation received 66,233 responses, 99% of which were from private citizens: quite a decent showing for a little publicised consultation, especially when you consider that Sir Patrick Vallance’s April 2023 report on Net Zero Society: Scenarios and Pathways chose to engage just 29 citizens in a ‘public’ (and by all accounts, distinctly private) dialogue.
An overwhelming proportion of the responses were opposed to the Government’s proposals, as listed below, with support for the Government proposals shown in brackets. (The apparent increase in public support in questions eight and nine may perhaps be attributed to the ‘reverse wording’ of these two questions – i.e., by disagreeing with the Question, respondents were agreeing with the Government’s proposal; no doubt we can expect to see more of this grammatical sleight of hand.)
Question one: 73% opposed (2% supported)
Question two: 76% opposed (2% supported)
Question three: 75% opposed (3% supported)
Question four: 89% opposed (6% supported)
Question five: 93% opposed (4% supported)
Question six: n/a
Question seven: 87% opposed (3% supported)
Question eight: 58% opposed (25% supported)
Question nine: 54% opposed (29% supported)
Question 10: 83% opposed (8% supported)
There is a certain grim relish in seeing the Government’s squirming attempt to burnish these dire levels of public support as some kind of moral victory. A grateful Cabinet Office pays tribute, for example, to the positive responses (2%) to Question one: “Government welcomes recognition by a small proportion of respondents that services which help people prove who they are would deliver better, joined up services.”
Those figures are damning enough. But the Cabinet Office has other, larger worries: the majority of respondents have got hold of the idea that “an individual’s data privacy was more important than the benefits of improved services” and don’t show much confidence in Government’s ability to keep their data private. Worse, instead of answering the detailed technical questions in the consultation, many respondents raised wider, societal questions about where this may all be leading. And the Cabinet Office knows why: “There is clear evidence that… many appear to have been significantly influenced by commentaries against implementing compulsory citizen digital identity in principle and data sharing to support it.” Those “anti-digital commentaries” have fed “an underlying mistrust of Government use of personal data”. Perhaps a new sin of ‘digital denialism’ is on its way?
In mitigation, the Cabinet Office has decided to exclude “up to 20%” of responses from the analysis, where respondents suggested that expanding the use of digital identity might “mean citizens would not be able to use cash, that they would support a social credit system, that they would lead to an identity card being introduced or that digital identities are going to be made mandatory for all people. As these wider matters were not part of the consultation we determined these responses on wider issues to be out of scope for analysis.”
Even then, the Cabinet Office feels it must apologise, with a shudder of genteel distaste, that the results analysed nevertheless appear “overwhelmingly skewed towards the majority who used the consultation as a vehicle to express these opinions”.
So, a well-rehearsed response, which will no doubt be repeated when analysis of the CBDC consultation is published. Public opposition is acknowledged and immediately mischaracterised: opponents have no agency but have been misled by vague, unnamed forces (“anti-digital commentaries” – seriously?) and opinions based on ‘misinformation’ can legitimately – no, must, for the sake of democracy – be ignored. Familiar stuff: shift the debate from, say, “Do you support the EU?” to “Who is funding the Leave campaign?” If that still sounds fanciful, here is the short FAQ sheet released by the Cabinet Office as a form of press release – an increasingly desperate set of ‘fact checks’ on made up claims from the imagined ‘anti-digital’ lobby, which attempts to portray citizens’ valid concerns about the Government’s motives and competence into a set of anti-misinformation soundbites (helpfully forwarded to friends, such as the Global Government Group, who can write puff pieces on the Government’s noble struggle against ignorance and superstition).
FAQs on Government digital identity consultation response.
U.K. Government responds to digital ID ‘misconceptions’ after public consultation.
After this humiliating rejection, is the Government pressing ahead with the policy? Of course it is.
Jean Marat is a pseudonym.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
“In mitigation, the Cabinet Office has decided to exclude “up to 20%” of responses from the analysis, where respondents suggested that expanding the use of digital identity might “mean citizens would not be able to use cash, that they would support a social credit system, that they would lead to an identity card being introduced or that digital identities are going to be made mandatory for all people. As these wider matters were not part of the consultation we determined these responses on wider issues to be out of scope for analysis.”
Just ignore opinions you don’t like! This is likely to be a model followed a lot in the coming years.
It’s that pesky 20% again.
How they must hate us.
The feeling is mutual
Meanwhile, the PSNI in Northern Ireland have demonstrated what can go wrong.
The reply from the Cabinet Office:
We have decided that the risk of this minor data breach is minimal and will take no action.
They have absoloutely zero interest in us citizens, I wonder if they realise that they are fermenting armed revolt against the unnamed and unknown BLOB, ie them?
With the last by election results showing centre right challenger parties at around three or four percent of the vote the BLOB may feel emboldened to press on with their agenda.If sufficient people of a centre right outlook are not prepared to vote for and become activists of challenger parties what chance of them taking to the streets?
Since the public has so obviously been misled by misinformation on social media, the government has no choice but to ignore the consultation results and go ahead as planned. I don’t suppose there will be any less misinformation when the next general election takes place, either.
We shall sabotage, subvert, upset and frustrate any and all effort to push through with digital ID. It shall not pass.
One of my bank account providers – Santander – has recently been “inviting” me to sign up to prove my identity with my voice, rather than the current log-in system I’ve been using for at least 12 years.
I declined, but unfortunately, the rejection wasn’t “Not until Hell freezes over.”
It might be a good idea to stop voting for people who (WHO) hate us
To complement your post here’s a 7min John Campbell vid, mainly taken up with the speech from Tedros if people haven’t seen it. ”Ominous” is indeed the word, in my opinion. What with all of this infrastructure building and manoeuvering of legislation all they really need now is another one of those timely faux plandemics….
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1ZGbqXrfD8&ab_channel=Dr.JohnCampbell
I agree, an excellent piece from the new World Dictator. His colours show clearly. Defund the Dangerous UN now, and destroy every bit of its existance.
https://t.co/EVsHs9HdGS
doctors from Trinidad and Tobago asking their government not to sign up.
really succinct in 5 points!
So what. Digital ID is what “they” want to happen because, well, that’s what The RPTB want.
However, I have a very good friend, very high up at the top of the HSBC, who tells me that it simply will not work, and some of them know it.. It’s been modelled to death for a good few years now, and it’s very bad news – for them.
It’s too complex – even with the advent of A.I. – and that’s assuming everyone complies.. Lol.
It’s all about the human condition and apparently, around 20% of us just won’t play ball, and they know that.
Maybe another reason for them trying to eliminate us.
That 20% were the ones who didn’t take ze jab – maybe it was a real vaccine… for a yet to be released killer coof mk2?!
Good point , all the dissenters gone in a flash leaving the jab damaged to carry on like good little worker ants with Orwell’s Boot on all their faces .
Interesting idea, but the vaccines are many times more dangerous than the alleged disease, and people are beginning to notice. The excess death numbers (no reason given) are rising still, although many more informed people are becoming frightened as a friend or two suddenly die off, no reason can be found! Except the reason can be found and is difficult to ignore, except by the complicit Government Officials, like Valance!
Meanwhile, the PSNI in Northern Ireland have demonstrated what can go wrong.
Reported your fake ass!!
I told them in short, blunt but polite language that I did not support any of the suggested measures because I knew that they were aimed at the very things that the government claimed they are not and now they have decided to ignore my comments because I can see through their subterfuge.
Maybe next time I should just use a thermonuclear weapon instead!
Once again another young, fit lad dies suddenly and once again no mention of jab status. Wonder if he was in a school that mandated them…Just another case of ‘coinciditis’ presumably. Nothing out of the ordinary in Clown World.
”A Jefferson County high school basketball standout died Thursday afternoon.
Pinson Valley High School senior Caleb White suffered a medical emergency at school. Life-saving efforts were started at the school, and White was transported to the hospital where he was pronounced dead.
The incident happened in the late morning.
Principal Michael Turner announced the student’s death in a note sent to parents which was later shared with the media.
Turner said counseling would be available to students and staff in the coming days.
White’s grandfather, George Varnadoe Jr., posted on Facebook that his 17-year-old grandson collapsed while working out with the team.”
https://www.al.com/news/2023/08/pinson-valley-high-school-star-basketball-player-caleb-white-dies-after-medical-emergency-at-school.html
The story:
Lets see the autopsy findings please. Oh no it is not allowed, the findings are all normal for a lad of this age! What did he die of? Nothing!
Absoloute scientific failure to properly investigate because the reason is already known. It was one of these:
Myocarditis, Pericarditis, heart failure because the muscle was infiltrated by spike protein, blood clots in major blood vessels, formed from spike protein. This data would be deadly to the scammers so is suppressed. It will happen to many many millions more of us yet.
Isn’t it strange how the sudden death of young people, particularly young athletes, is no longer considered newsworthy?
Almost as thought it’s become too common to report on.
This is what a bureaucratic technocracy disguised as democracy looks like.
‘In mitigation, the Cabinet Office has decided to exclude “up to 20%” of responses from the analysis, where respondents suggested that expanding the use of digital identity might “mean citizens would not be able to use cash, that they would support a social credit system…’ etc
‘it’, not ‘they’, right? (‘it’ referring to ‘expanding the use of’ ? – because otherwise it kind of looks the writer is saying that ‘it’ refers to ‘respondents’…
Up to 20%? They cannot even count properly. That statement is utterly meaningless. It means that the replies were screened before even counting anything, and some random number thrown away!
Public Consultation In Name Only – PCINO!
With an acronym like that it’s just asking for a film to be made about it – – but, unlike the Government report, that would just be fictional misinformation!
At one time I would not have wanted ID cards. But then with the mass immigration and illegal aliens entering whenever they feel like it, I started to want ID cards as a means of not allowing those entering illegally to access benefits, housing etc. But then I realised that government want mass immigration and they would not actually use D cards for that or similar purposes. So now I am back telling them to stick their ID card where the sun don’t shine, unless they are going to police the border, which they clearly are not.
” FACT: Cybersecurity is a critical priority for the government. We recognise how important it is to protect users and their data and have robust measures in place to ensure the security and integrity of online government services and systems. “
Slightly embarrassing after the identity and personal data of the entire complement of the Northern Irish Police Service – including those officers who are linked to MI5 – was released online for anyone to see.
At least, it would be slightly embarrassing if the Government had any integrity and/or morality.
Don’t forget that a few years ago, the entire database of Child Benefit recipients was similarly released.
Resistance is key to stopping this, don’t pay ULEZ if enough don’t pay it will crater the system, use cash as often as you can, boycott those places that refuse to take it, don’t accept digital I.D. mass civil disobedience is called for its the only thing that will bring real change.
Everyone should email their MP and ask if, in the light of the results of this consultation, the government will abandon plans for DID. And if the answer is no, ask why not. I already did so.
In General, We, The People, Do NOT line Fascism, Tyranny & Totalitarianism. the AWAKE Minority , is a Bigger Minority & the Ultimately, Politicians who are Governed by Money Lenders & Including Money Lenders, will be Banished By The People. People will Revert to a Civilisation That PEOPEL will hold accountable & Banish these folks.
tick tock tick tock tick tock