By silicon.com, 26 May 2005 17:00
NEWS The UK government's reintroduction of legislation for a national identity card is perhaps the biggest IT story of the week.
Ditched by Labour before the General Election, the scheme returns with a focus on softer issues such as how it could help tackle identity theft and stop the abuse of public services - rather than combat global terrorism.
silicon.com has been following the story closely. Here's a round-up of our ongoing coverage.
National ID card scheme 'will cost £18bn'
Home Office disagrees with LSE estimate but hides behind "commercial confidentiality" card.
Like it or not, here come ID cards
silicon.com columnist Simon Moores didn't like the ID card scheme the first time around - and nothing's changed this time to alter his stance.
CIO Jury: IT leaders slam national ID card plans
UK IT chiefs rule the ID card scheme will end up being a "fee-fest" for suppliers.
Private sector could face ID card costs
Companies may end up footing some of the bill for the ID card plans if they want to use the system to prove the identity of their customers or staff.
ID cards: Biometrics work... sort of
While the public is confident with the process of having their biometrics registered, questions still remain over the viability of the technology.
Government has "no doubts" about ID card tech
The biometric technology underpinning the identity cards plan is OK, though the public sector has learned from previous mistakes, says one minister.
ID card plans are back and 'more popular'
The UK government is preparing to reintroduce legislation paving the way for its controversial biometric identity cards.
Leader: Government should stay soft on ID cards
There are still some hitches with the overall plan, though.
Highlights of our prior coverage:
Blair to make ID cards concessions
Prime Minister Tony Blair will reintroduce the controversial national ID cards bill but a senior government official has admitted that concessions will have to be made to ensure its passage through parliament.
ID cards may test Blair's reduced majority
Identity cards look set to be one of the first tests of Prime Minister Tony Blair's vastly reduced majority after leading the Labour Party to victory in a third successive General Election.
Lib Dem manifesto hits out at ID cards
"Hundreds of millions [of pounds] can be saved by not introducing ID cards," say Lib Dems.
ID card and biometric passport roadmap updated
The UK Passport Service has updated its roadmap for introducing passports incorporating biometric information, a key building block of the government's controversial identity card scheme.
Leader: UK ID cards - devil is in the detail
Worrying questions are still unanswered about Blunkett's controversial plans.
Comments
There are 2 comments. Join the discussion
1. anonymous
The National ID card scheme is like the Living Dead, it just won't die.
Its illiberal, an afront to our right to privacy, and almost certainly beyond both the governments ability to manage, let alone implement. And yet 80% of the general public support the scheme, and its going to cost billions of tax-payer £.
Remember the Football Supporters Id scheme back in the eighties ? That was the governments first stab at making us all carry id cards, but was dropped because most football supportes wouldn't pay for an id card.
Almost 20 years later the Government is trying again to nanny us into carrying cards.
Time to leave the country ?
2. Ken Hall
The 80% figure is a misleading figure.
It was a MORI poll that asked if people objected to an ID card. On principle most people do not mind having a means of proving their ID. However, what was not asked was,
"Would you pay up to £300.00 pounds for a compulsory ID card that is tracked via an intrusive back end database implemented by a Government with a deplorable track record in large IT projects and that allows your personal information to be accessed by just about anybody and is not proven to prevent fraud, crime, illegal immigration or terrorism but that could, if improperly implemented, result in you being imprisoned for other people's administrative errors?"
I have not found a single person that would approve that more honest question.