Surely this law is half-baked?

[chakka35]

Chris Grayling, MP and his team, having flown from London to Edinburgh by domestic airline, were asked for their passports or other ID “with photograph” at Edinburgh airport.
He naturally protested at the idea that British citizens should have to carry and show passports in their own country. But, apparently, the anti-terrorism Act 2000 does give the police the authority to do such checks at random.

Quite apart from the sheer impertinence of this, how can it possibly work?

What is the point of giving the police such powers when there is no equivalent law requiring citizens to carry such ID? What would happen if I arrived at Edinburgh and, when challenged, said” No, I don’t carry my passport in my own country. No, I always keep my driving-licence in a drawer at home. No, I carry no other ID, neither does the law require me to do so”?

What would happen?

[chakka35]

Many thanks, New Judge, for that informed answer. Frankly, I am appalled that the police and other officials have been given such powers, especially since commonsense should tell anyone that they will not prevent or discourage terrorism.

So now I know. If I go to Scotland by air I will carry a passport to get on the aircraft but will refuse on principle to show it at the other end. I will wait out the nine hours and write a piece about it for publication. Protests against such interference with our rights have got to start somewhere.

Or...I will go by coach, train, car or private boat. Apparently terrorists never use such conveyances. What a load of tosh.

Whiskeryron -- the nation had that argument a few years ago and we lovers of freedom won it. You may remember that after WWII the government proposed to retain Identity Cards but public outrage at the idea forced them to drop it. Presumably that generation had more recent memories of the freedoms we (well, my parents' generation) had fought for and weren't going to give them up at the whim of a bunch of politicians.

Sadly, we seem not to be made of such spirit any more.

[dinki]

15 years ago I flew to Scotland with a group of politicians and we all had to show id, some even had to get passports to ensure they could fly. This is nothing new - you would think a minister would know this.

[New Judge]

Yes chakka, the Act certainly gives the police wide powers and these will almost certainly be abused or at the very least used for purposes other than those for which they were introduced. The most enlightening insight into the minds of the legislators that I find is that in para 1 of the section says:

“An examining officer may question a person to whom this paragraph applies for the purpose of determining whether he appears to be a person falling within section 40(1)(b).”

Fine. They want to establish who is a terrorist and who is not (though quite how producing a passport will prove or disprove this is hard to imagine, but no matter).

But para 4 goes on to say:

“An examining officer may exercise his powers under this paragraph whether or not he has grounds for suspecting that a person falls within section 40(1)(b)”

So we don’t actually care whether or not we suspect you of being a terrorist, we just want the power to demand you produce your passport in circumstances where it is not strictly necessary..

The problem with all this type of legislation is that it imposes restrictions or requirements on people which cannot be shown to be necessary or effective. There is no “intelligence” in place to limit its use (and indeed some arguments suggest that to do so would leave officers open to accusations of discrimination). Such random “checks” without intelligence are ineffective, a waste of resources and a curtailment of civil liberties. Quite how the country has been made a safer place because Mr Grayling and his colleagues were forced to produce their passports after they had disembarked an aircraft and were about to leave the airport is difficult to understand.

[chakka35]

Thank you again, New Judge, for your analysis.

It seems to me that we have to weigh what we have lost against what we have gained. In this case we have lost a highly precious long-term right to travel our own country without let or hindrance. Against that we have gained very little if anything since, as you say, these oppressive measures will do nothing to prevent or deter terrorism.

Two scenarios:

1. I am a British terrorist with a passport and a drving licence. I travel to Scotland by air, show my ID then join my fellow terrorists to concoct some atrocity or other.

2. I am a terrorist without acceptable ID. I go to Scotland by rail, coach or car, thus avoiding security checks and join my fellow terrorists..etc.

What good have the ID checks produced to compensate us all for our loss of freedom?

[Old_Geezer]

I only have photographic ID on me if carrying the work pass, and the photo on that must be at least a decade old. I don't use domestic flights but would be astounded to be asked for a passport were I to do so. Total infringment on my rights to move freely in my own country, which should include all of the UK.

[chakka35]

Well said, OG.