This appears to be a thinly veiled consultation for a digital ID system that would at least be regulated by government. It is no coincidence that it has been rushed out while the government prepares digital vaccine passports.
And yes, of course different organisations have information about your activities: banks, TFL, etc. But that’s the point. They are *different* organisations; and that information may only be accessed by the authorities - separately - with a warrant.
This suggestion is for one identification document that - for the pathetic benefit of ‘convenience’ (or saving a v small amount of time) - will contain all the above ‘attributes’.
And they are just the beginning. The government no longer bother denying that they are considering a vaccine ‘passport’; or that it might even be used to ‘enable’ access to ordinary life. Ie that it would exclude* those without it.
And once some medical information is added, what next? There is no reason in principle why some other health ‘crisis’ might not be used to justify further medical information being ‘needed’ to keep us ‘safe’.
Never have we been asked to trust the government more.
What studies have been commissioned about this? Those, in particular, reviewing the long-term risks to those who have worn masks over prolonged periods in the past.
Is the answer that none were commissioned and those that might have been published were not considered?
I think we can be quietly confident that, so far as the government is concerned, that is indeed the answer.
Irrespective of evidence of the efficacy of masks in clinical settings and (more importantly) within the community, no requirement to wear masks can be proportionate or ethical if it has not weighed their potential benefit against their risk of harm.
Isn't is lovely to see all these quiet, dead cities, closed factories and grounded aircraft.
Take this as a warning that if lockdowns are accepted in *any* circumstances they will be imposed for 'climate' reasons before long.
Lockdowns should be prohibited in any circumstances.
One person has a cough and the whole of the financial capital of the perfect utopia that is New Zealand is shut down. nzherald.co.nz/nz/covid-19-co…
This response doesn't make sense even on the 'logic' of eradication. The whole point of eradication - of exceptionally dangerous diseases like smallpox and Ebola NOT C19, but we'll put that to one side - is that you can contract trace the v v limited number of infected people.
Not that you must shut down an entire city because of one incident.
Of all the turncoat nominal liberals and conservatives,@DominicRaab is one of the most disgraceful.
He actually wrote a book on liberty but was at the forefront of the lockdown and its perpetuation by the ‘Five Tests’ and now suggests this grotesque, #CCP means of social control.
@cjsnowdon@mitrebarnet Then why do you reply with something about deaths, not hospitalisations?
1. Data on hospital ‘admissions’ of patients with C19 includes anyone who has had a positive PCR test up to 14 days before admission, on admission or after admission: (coronavirus.data.gov.uk/about-data#eng…)/
@cjsnowdon@mitrebarnet 2. Any person testing positive within different seven day periods would be counted within each of those? See, from the NHS publication:
For example, if a person was tested on Thursday and Friday of the same week, they would only be counted once in the reporting week.
@cjsnowdon@mitrebarnet However, if someone was tested on Tuesday and Friday of the same week, that individual would be counted in 2 reporting periods, as the 2 tests fall into different 7-day reporting periods.
(gov.uk/government/pub…)
The People’s Republic of China is the most dangerous evil in our world today. Particularly due to its pernicious influence throughout the world and in international institutions.
No, the most *dangerous* evil for the world. There are worse regimes - Isis, etc - but they are not as dangerous. China’s tentacles, on the other hand, are everywhere.