In the same week that the US Department for Homeland Security further extended the deadline for biometric passports, recognising inadequacies in the technology, concerns relating to the cost and practical problems of implementing an ID card scheme in the UK are dogging the Government. The Home Secretary was forced to put up a vigorous defence of the proposals on Radio Four’s Today programme.
The Bill was re-introduced into Parliament in late May, following the forced withdrawal of the original bill after it ran out of time in the run up to the General Election on 5th May
The second reading is expected to be a fraught process for the government, and the Bill is expected to face a united opposition this time. Conservative and Liberal Democrat MPs are expected to oppose the measure, while many Labour MPs are uneasy about the Bill, with 19 of them rebelling against the Government in the last session of Parliament.
Public support for the scheme appears to be slipping too, according to an ICM poll published by campaign group NO2ID earlier this week. This showed that the scheme had an approval rating of only 55%, as opposed to 81% in December.
The Government has been placed on the defensive about the cost of the scheme following a leaked study by the London School of Economics, due to be published shortly, which was reported to show that the costs involved could be between £200 and £300 per card.
Speaking yesterday on the Today programme, Home Secretary Charles Clarke attacked the figure as “a complete nonsense figure”, and promised that the cost of the card would be a lot less. He accused the LSE of releasing the study a bit at a time, and of not showing the Government the full text of the report. – Official figures say the "indicative unit cost" will be £93 for a combined card and passport, up from £85 in December.
In response, the LSE issued a statement explaining that its report does not suggest a unit cost for the ID card, but predicts that the proposed identity and passport system would cost £12 - £18 billion over ten years – a prediction that the research team stands by.
Commentators have used this figure to come up with a total cost of £300, simply by dividing £18 billion by the UK population, said the LSE.
According to Howard Davies:
"The researchers involved have offered to discuss this work with the Home Office several times. Charles Clarke may not like the conclusions, but he has no basis to question the integrity of the LSE or those conducting the research."
The LSE is not the only body at odds with the Government over the identity card scheme. In the past few days a number of other individuals, agencies and bodies have stepped forward to voice their concerns.
Speaking to the London Assembly on Wednesday, Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Ian Blair warned that unless the biometric technology behind the scheme was “almost perfect” the Government’s proposals would fail. He said:
“I am in favour of ID cards but we have to get right the technology that lies behind it. I am not an expert on iris recognition and I am seeing different experts coming forward with different points of view. We have to settle that question. The biometrics have to be as close to foolproof as possible".
The Government’s proposals require that ID cards include unique personal identifiers such as digital facial images, fingerprints and iris scans, but the technology behind the biometrics is new, and still involves high levels of error.
Responding to Commissioner Blair’s comments, Shadow Home Secretary David Davis said:
"Britain's most senior police officer has confirmed that ID cards would be ineffective if the technology behind them was not near perfect. Yet recent test results have shown large error rates for biometric information and the Government have refused to address our concerns or answer any of our questions as to the effectiveness of the technology.”
"This obstinate stance combined with the Government's appalling record at implementing technology based projects does not bode well.”
He called upon the Government to address these concerns, or face the project turning into “Labour’s poll tax”.
Members of the London Assembly on Wednesday called upon the Government to review its plans to introduce identity cards, agreeing – by fifteen votes to five - a measure that read:
"This Assembly believes the Government’s plans for ID cards will not prove to be a cost effective measure in combating crime, raise legitimate concerns about civil liberties and will not represent good value for money.
"This Assembly notes that London’s share of the estimated £3 billion over 10 years that a national ID card scheme will cost would pay for an extra 7,200 police on London’s streets, a much more effective way of combating crime and terrorism."
Assembly Members expressed concern that the technology was unproven, the system would be open to abuse and there was no evidence that such cards would prevent acts of terrorism or identity theft.
"The message from the London Assembly is loud and clear,” said Assembly Chair, Sally Hamwee. “The ID card scheme being put forward by Ministers, in which there is little confidence, will cost an extraordinary amount of taxpayers’ money. This could instead be used to fund thousands of extra police on London’s streets.”
Earlier this month the British Medical Association and the Joint Council for the Welfare of Immigrants expressed concern that plans for a national ID card could produce a risk to public health if the card deters overstayers and others from seeking medical help.
The risk arises because the Government wants ID Card checks to be undertaken when a patient registers with a GP practice or visits a hospital out-patients clinic for the first time.
However, there are concerns that those who have no right to remain in the UK – the overstayers – might not register with a GP or visit a hospital if they fear their lack of residency status could be drawn to the attention of immigration authorities. The public health risk is increased if the ID Card does actually deter those individuals who have contracted a notifiable disease from accessing medical services to treat their condition, says the BMA.
The Scottish Executive yesterday set out its position on ID cards, confirming that ID cards will not be needed to access devolved services in Scotland This will mean that the proposed savings of the ID Card, for example, in countering "health tourism" will be much reduced in Scotland. Services that are not devolved will still follow the UK line.
