"1984 is not an instruction manual"
We should be monitoring the Government, not them monitoring us.
Maybe you have nothing to hide, but think about it a little bit further, maybe someone else has something to hide, and a lack of privacy will affect you.
Any-time anyone does something that they don't want to become public (doesn't have to be something illegal - just embarrassing - e.g. talking about past behaviour or a medical issue), the potential for coercion has just been opened up.
If you have noting to hide, then the government has nothing to see and should not be looking.
If you think you have done nothing wrong, that would depend on who is deciding what is right and wrong.
"Halt. Papers please".
The reason this is different from other forms of ID is that it contains your bio-information (fingerprint) Giving this to the government will give them the new ability know anywhere you've been - and you can't take that ability away from them.
You may say that you have nothing to hide, and trust this government not to misuse that power, but are you going to say that you will trust all future governments, without having had a look at them? Also are you going to trust every minor civil servant who has access to this, not to let it fall into the hands of just anybody who is willing to bribe them?
You have a right to privacy.
ID cards are a complete waste of money and effort by a government that I'm convinced has more sinister reasons for wanting them.
There is only one reason to introduce ID cards and that is to require people to carry them. Once that happens it follows that the police can then stop anyone they like with no reasonable suspicion other than that the card is not being carried.
Quite apart from the distasteful return by the back door of the suss laws this fundamentally changes the relationship between the public and the police and, by extension, the state.
Spain has ID cards, does that mean they have no crime or terrorists. The same must be true of France too.
Imagine in twenty years time going to the supermarket checkout and being prevented from buying pizza because your medical records indicate your cholesterol is too high or you having the bottle of wine removed from your bag because you've had your 21 units for this week. Just because we are paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get us.
Whether or not someone has something to hide doesn't enter the equation. Privacy is an individual's sacred territory that no other individual or group has the right to violate for any reason whatsoever. The exception is when a crime has been committed, probable cause has been presented, and a specific warrant has been obtained would it be permissible to invade one's privacy to conduct an investigation.
Next time somebody says they don't mind the violation of privacy, because they have nothing to hide, go ahead and take a look through their purse or wallet and demonstrate the contradiction in their logic when they flip out.
What about those who say they trust their government with their private information.
That may be the case now, but what about when the leadership changes, and what about 10 years from now?
Privacy is linked to the presumption of innocence