My apologies bazzab - I see the errors in my ways of backing up arguments with facts, when ad hominem arguments and misinterpretations are far more convincing.

Particularly, I should not care about what the government legislates for, as it will certainly not affect my life, which I spend dossing around and generally neither doing my research nor thinking long and hard about anything of importance.

Insomniac - I think you miss my point. Although one can always interpet cultures and events relatively in terms 'good' or 'bad' socially, there are limits to that intellectual practise.

All our lives here are good - I just think we should intend on keeping it that way.

While Otto's claims might be extending it to a worst case scenario, there are certainly indications that, yes, it certainly can happen in our lifetime. For example, Westminster council are very busy fitting a large number of security cameras with tiny microphones, under the pretense of 'measuring urban noise' (!?).
I suggest you maybe do a bit of research - it's a lot more than 'someone knowing where you shop'. Like I said, I don't currently think it constructive to discuss motives atm - the physical evidence is more than enough.

As for too much time on my hands - I wish!! (Damn my research project!)

Bazzab - who is more paranoid - a government obsessed with watching our every move, or concerned individuals who see this as potentially dangerous? This isn't David Icke stuff, for god's sake.

Insomniac, I really don't think historical relativism is relevant here.

For example, Stalin's gulag was a 'cultural norm' for a while in Russia. Would you have been passive enough to say 'so be it' to that?

I'd love it if this were some kind of bonkers conspiracy theory, but unfortunately conspiracy theories are built on coincidences and half-truths. Whatever the motive, this 'surveillance' scheme is definitely underway. It is quintessentially anti-democratic and anti-libertarian.

Now, where's my telescreen?

But back to more serious talk, the biggest problems are its compulsarity and the hazy nature of its policy. Other countries have ID cards, but not with the proposed level of centralised, screened information. This is a very socially dangerous proposal, without concerning ourselves with the agenda behind it (which the government have yet to reveal - the crime/immigration/terrorists smokescreens have been admitted as unfeasible by ministers themselves). The potential for abuse is quite clear. If we have an all-seeing surveillance network running (however long it takes for this to occur, but it appears the aims of our government), it only takes one 'dodgy' government to truely destroy what semblance of a democracy we have left.

Unfortunately, the point is not whether or not you have anything to hide. It is in fact the precedent that is set.

Take an analogy - This government is basically acting like that fraky ex-girl/boyfriend who tries to follow you around all day and challenges you to justify each of your acions!