The government's proposed "child database" - which will hold virtually every piece of information it is possible to know, from where they live to what they eat - will "ruin family privacy" according to a report from Parliament's Information Commissioner.
Congratulations, Mr Parliament Information Commissioner - you get an A+ in stating the bleedin' obvious. Of course it will ruin family privacy -that's the whole point!
The pretext of this intrusion into our lives is that it will help prevent another Victoria Climbie happening. It won't.
The database - officially called the Children's Index - follows the horrific death of eight-year-old Victoria Climbie in 2000. She was tortured and starved by her aunt and her aunt's partner both of whom were later jailed for life.
It is hoped that the index, which is due to be operational within two years, will sound an early warning in such cases by recording health and other developmental information about all children.
The thing is, it's not as if Victoria's plight was unknown to the authorities. In fact they had twelve separate occasions when they could have intervened - and did nothing. The abuse of Victoria was known or suspected by social workers, the police and hospital staff.
In the months leading to her death, Victoria was brought to the attention of three local authorities, the police and the NHS, but time and again she was handed back to her abusers.
They did nothing! They knew she was in danger and they handed the poor child back to her torturers. The local authorities knew, the police knew and the NHS knew.
Towards the end of her life, Victoria was admitted to North Middlesex Hospital. She was covered in injuries, bruises and burns. Again she was returned to Kouao and Manning.
Bastards! The poor child even pleaded with the authorities herself.
The most chilling sentence in the report into the death of Victoria Climbie refers to the eight-year-old shouting at a social worker: "I am not lying. I must tell you more. It is true."
Three months later, Victoria was dead.
So how will this "Children's Index" help? If a child that is already known to be in trouble by three local authorities, many social workers, the police and the NHS is just handed back to her abusers to be tortured to death - how will this database help?
It won't. Victoria Climbie died not because nobody knew of her plight - but because of multiculturalism and political correctness. Nobody would interfere because - "well, it's their culture, init". Nobody would get involved because it would appear politically incorrect and insensitive to people of other cultures to do so - and all cultures are equal according to progressive liberals. Even cultures that allow the systemic abuse and torture of children.
With this "Children's Index" (notice the way it's named - to sound as if it "belongs" to the children rather than the government. We actually have an index of children; it's called the birth register) nothing will change in the way the authorities deal with cases - except your Mr and Mrs Average will be targeted.
What will happen is that Mr & Mrs Smith from Acacia Gardens will have their children taken away - not because those children are abused, not because they are not loved, not because they do not love their parents - but because they don't eat enough fruit and veg, or they don't do enough homework. And because it's easy to do so and not politically incorrect to do so.
This is how it happens in Britain today. We've given up on targeting criminals or punishing wrong doers as it's not egalitarian enough. We have to punish everyone. A more trivial example of this is the proliferation of "sleeping policemen" in our roads. Rather than focus on those that do speed, catching and punishing them, the authorities come up with a system that punishes all road users - even the law abiding. It's easier, you see. And it's "egalitarian".
That's why we have to have this "Children's Index" covering ALL children, not just those that are genuinely vulnerable. In reality, virtually every vulnerable child is already known to the authorities and known for a long time. Like Victoria, the majority of these children are in the care of someone who falls into a particular victim group. The prevailing culture in child protection and social services is to not take children into care - if those children are in the care of drug addicts, known alcoholics, single mothers who have multiple partners, prostitutes, people from "other cultures" or some other group that has officially attributed victimhood status.
So we all have to have our lives intruded into and, because those who accept the law and authority of government are easier to intimidate and prosecute and, because it's not politically incorrect to pick on white British parents - it is these parents who are probably doing the best they can, but just don't happen to be perfect parents (no one is) who will be targeted rather than those who really do abuse the children in their care.