another German here. The German forestry commision knows zip about my tax affairs. What a bizarre assertion
There was a long list of organisations (trying to find it online) who had asked for access to the proposed database and by extension people's details in 2006. Forestry Commission was one that stuck in my mind. More details on it here
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Identity_Cards_Act_2006
IIRC it was also suggested that certain people such as MPs and 'celebrities' could opt out of being on the database - so it would end up being all the plebs who had their lives scrutinised. There was a lot of opposition at the time and this post on a now defunct site pretty much sums it up
I've no idea what the vote was. But the number of the libertarians is irrelevant to how ridiculous the philosophy is.
That's not the issue. The Lords has repeatedly tried to call this government to account over this scheme, something that hasn't taken place in the other place, and repeatedly they've been overruled and ignored. The very real questions posed by their lordships have been swept under the carpet, and their objections spun as the ranting of "libertarians" or "airy-fairies".
There's a very real principle here, and it's not a soley "libertarian" agenda. That principle is about the relationship between citizens and government. As a citizen, I hold a fundamental belief in my right to privacy and freedom. I do not think we live by "government permission", and that we are the servants of the government - if anything, the government should be our servant. And it should certainly not be a function of our government to engage in blanket surveillance of law abiding citizens, or to instigate compulsory mechanisms of identification, or to keep monolithic files on each and every citizen, or to criminalise people who refuse to comply. It's simply not their business.
Sure, there's a balance to be made all the time between individual freedom and privacy, and the overall safety and security of society as a whole. But this balance requires constant vigilance from us, each and every time out freedoms are curtailed by those in power. We must be prepared to challenge those violations of our freedom and privacy each and every time they are proposed, and the problem with the NIR is that it basically gives a blank cheque to this and every future government to do what they want with those freedoms and privacy without the required level of scrutiny. Currently, it appears that only the Lords are carrying out any scrutiny at all, and the response from the government reeks to high heaven - it's almost as if they really do have something to hide.
Everything else - the fact that it won't prevent terrorism, or crime (in fact, it'll probably just create more crime), or benefit fraud, or tax evasion, the amount it'll cost, the inconvenience of being turned into a number and all the other problems - is secondary to my fundamental objection to this proposal. By default, I'm in favour of freedom and privacy, and suspicious of any attempt by vested government or corporate interests to restrict that freedom and privacy for their own ends. You call that "libertarianism". I call it democracy.