B O'Brien

Yet again Badenoch has shown how the state and the policymaking community hate the young and listen only to the old. And some observers lap it up. We can't go on like this.

It's not necessarily fine. You might object to it, in fact I know you do. But that isn't the point in this thread, is it? The thread is about whether Full Fact are right, not about whether we like the policy. Your last reply, albeit aggrieved, accepts that Full Fact have indeed got the policy right

The press release by HMG did not say it would be necessary to engage with public services. It said it was mandatory for Right to Work checks. It was very specific and clear.

This is why we have to have fact-checkers. You are just making things up.

By "semantics, you mean the facts.

It is not true that everyone in the UK will be required to have it. I, for one, won't be required to have it. Therefore, it is not mandatory for everyone in the UK.

They haven't got it wrong.

The Lib Dems said that the id would be mandatory for everyone. HMG says it would be required for Right to Work checks but is not mandatory otherwise. So someone not starting a new job would not need it. Ergo, it is not mandatory for everyone, ergo Full Fact is right.

...additional revenue for the Treasury. So it depends on how long term a view you want to take. It is a loss of revenue for 10 years, and an increase in revenue thereafter.

Having said, that, these are all just rumours. It is just what the think tank's workings out said.

In the think tank proposal, there would be a loss of revenue from a house sale by ending SDLT. Instead, the house purchaser would pay a new annual property tax. It would take about 10 years for those annual payments to compensate for that Year 1 loss. After that, the revenue would be ...

While the Tories want to scrap VAT on private schools, Labour are introducing breakfast clubs across the country to help the poorest in society. Labour spoke about a Britain built for all, and tackling child poverty. The difference between the two parties is clear.

"Digital ID will be mandatory for Right to Work checks by the end of the Parliament.". That's not everyone, as the Lib Dems have falsely claimed.

Full Fact is correct.

The claim by the Lib Dems is that it will be mandatory for everyone. HMG has said it will be required for entering employment but it will not be mandatory for everyone. For example, someone not looking to get a new job would not need it.

Thanks. Is there a source for the Tories' score?

...would get your point across without breaking the law and would not entail your volunteers acquiring criminal records.

Do you even warn your volunteers of the serious effects on their lives of having criminal records?

It's unnecessary.

You are right. Jonathan Hall KC, the UK government Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Legislation has written as much in The Observer. No doubt charges against this individual will be dropped. But that begs a question of you. Why don't you ask *all* your volunteers to display that message? It...

Mandatory to get a job, like photo Id is already mandatory to get a job.

It will not be illegal to have no digital ID.

You get a new phone and reinstall your banking app,your digital ID app and all your other apps.

What a disgusting thing to write.

Really? I haven't got any of it.

The point I am making is that you seem to be calling the UK an imperial power, which is of course untrue.

Keep up.

One would expect also that a digital token, eg a bar code, would be time-,limited in its validity and could only be useful to the authorized possessor of a verification app, eg an accredited employer or agency. So the token, standing alone, would not be much, if any, use to anyone else.

Would you like to explain yourself more?

... facsimiles of your personal id documents all over the place is not free of security risk and in fact the risk of that is almost certainly far higher than of a biometrically secured app being compromised

Malware would have to log into the app first. Malware has not had much success logging into banking apps since biometric logins. However, yes, it could be a risk in the future, for all critical apps, whether banking or id.

Nothing is free of security risk. The current practice of leaving ...

Your id attributes would not be stored on your phone app, though. Your banking app does not store in it you account details.

That sounds like a risk that is not particular to the app but applues to the phone and it's firmware.

They would probably get a plastic card with an NFC chip embedded in it. That is how digital ID works in France and Italy when it is not on an app.

Your passport does not have location tracking in it but it is an instrument for establishing your right to work.

You will only have the ability to provide a digital token if you have the id app (or card if not using the app). You will only have the app if you have proved your right to it (just as you only have a passport if you have proved your right). The id and its token will indicate your right to work.