By Simon Moores, 31 May 2005 11:55
COMMENT The latest attempt to introduce a national ID card in the UK is as flawed as previous attempts, says Simon Moores. Yet it appears the government is pushing ahead with the plan regardless.
When the UK government, under previous Home Secretary David Blunkett, first attempted to place its proposal for its ID card legislation before parliament, I thought that the many technical, fiscal and civil liberties objections presented a sound platform for its rejection.
At no time, for example, did government risk debating its plans on any of the platforms offered outside parliament. In one example a year ago, at the London School of Economics (LSE), nobody from the Home Office appeared to discuss the issues with parliamentary leaders, legal and government groups and leading figures in the privacy and identity space.
At that meeting, I wrote: "Never have I seen a pillar of government policy look so demonstrably fragile and flawed. Neatly dissected by the opening arguments of the Shadow Home Secretary and then buried alive by the experts who followed, we were offered little or no reason to believe that an identity card would be proportionate, cost effective or even capable of addressing the problems surrounding terrorism or illegal immigration."
Twelve months further on to the day and Home Secretary Charles Clarke is driving the ID card bandwagon with what is in essence the same bill that was tabled before the General Election.
The LSE is about to publish research that reportedly suggests the true cost of the scheme could exceed £18bn - three times the official estimate - or as high as £300 per card holder. The plan will, by 2013, result in 44 million adults being issued a card containing personal details, stored on a central database which can be accessed by public sector organisations, without the individual's consent.
Only last week, the Home Office issued its own estimate that the cost of running the scheme, in conjunction with a new biometric passport system, would be £5.8bn over the next decade. That's an average of £93 per card holder.
Simply perfecting accuracy of biometric recognition is likely to absorb a significant proportion of the government's initial £5bn budget. Bearing in mind that the UK has the highest scrap rate of government IT projects in the G7, this sounds like another job for one of the lucky members of a small cartel of companies that dominate 51 per cent of our public sector IT projects.
Despite all this, government appears determined to bulldoze its identity card bill through a parliament that does not fully share the Prime Minister's conviction that such cards will achieve a dramatic impact on fraud, terrorism and identity theft.
Previous experience suggests a project of this size built upon leading-edge technologies is more likely to fail than to succeed but the government's touching faith in its suppliers may yet make this the single most expensive IT project of the new parliament.
Tomorrow's solution to today's identity crisis is not to be found embedded on a plastic card. It's a far greater problem which demands a much broader understanding by politicians of the context of personal identity in a rapidly widening 21st century information space.
Comments
There are 16 comments. Join the discussion
1. Robin Wilton
Thank you, Simon. As we seem doomed to have the minimum parliamentary debate on this topic, your pressure for public discussion is all the more important.
Best wishes,
Robin Wilton
http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/racingsnake/20050531
2. Ken Hall
Absolutely correct.
We need to get this information to as many people as possible. The only way to defeat this flawed, erroneous and potentially corrupt bill is to get the vast majority of the people against it too.
A demo of 10 million people in london may do it. one to two million people didn't stop the Iraq war, perhaps 10 million will stop the ID card.
3. CMylod
I keep thinking every time I see the predicted user charge that this oh-so-brilliant ID plan will die a death when people just refuse for financial reasons to stump up for it. Have a few deaths caused by people too poor to have ID before being able to claim benefits and voila the perfect defence before a court, the whole thing dies a death.
4. Attila The Nun
We are not a poor nation, we can afford £300 per head.
Loss of personal privacy and having to carry an id card - which has always been the case in many countries - is the price we must pay for better security.
Moores is purportedly anti criminal and anti vandal - he apparently hates hoodies and disruptive youths - this is the best way to stop their antisocial activities,they will feel more of a target and be more easily ticketed and fined if they are instantly identifiable by having to carry an id card.
5. Andrew Clark
Well put Simon!
As well as costs, security is bound to become an insurmountable problem.
Whatever form of encryption is employed, any would-be cryptanalyst will start with an advantage. They know what sort of data is on the card and have obvious "cribs" - the person's name and photo.
Given that and the projected increases in computing power over life of the project, nobody is in any position to guarantee security.
If this benighted project goes ahead I foresee an ongoing "arms race" between the authorities and hackers that the authorities cannot hope to win.
Guess who will have to pay for this exercise in futility...!
6. Bill Okeefe
wouldnt it be cheaper to tatoo a number on everybodys right forearm?
7. anonymous
Tattoos - yes why not, it should be your National Health unique ID bar-coded, satisfying two uber-projects in one hit.
8. Ben Lim
The ID card was firstly to stop terrorism, now it is not because ID Theft is the hotest crime now so using the ID card to stop ID Theft is the popular excuse that the public is mroe willing to buy.
There is only one way to stop the ID card - eliminate ID Theft.
Take away the excuse. We are working on that and we have just found the solution eliminate ID Theft to ZERO whereas ID card cannot.
9. M Hosey
Get real Attila! If you think a wee bit of plastic is going to stop a ned chucking a brick through your car window and then doing a runner you are seriously in need of a brain transplant. The only way an ID card is going to prevent hooliganism or slow the wee buggers down is if it's the size of a black board and weighs as much as a ball and chain. We'd be better of spending the money on community policing, social education and a few community projects that that can hold the kids attention.
10. Mark SPLINTER
atilla the nun.... the UK is not poor but has a limit. What would you take £300 away from to fund the ID card? Wouldn't you prefer decent schools so the yobs you talk about actually get an education? Do you think yobs give a toss about ID cards? You think they will magically stop misbehaving because they feel more "targeted"??? You have no idea. Like all pro card people, you ignore the fact that it is not technically feasible, and instead of listening to technical and legal experts you drone on about antisocial behaviour and/or terrorism. Sucker!
The proof that the ID scheme is lame is simple - just read the list of people who support it. All lamers.
11. Andrew Watson
Many silicon.com readers agree that the government's ID card scheme is flawed and dangerous. If you want to actively help fight it, please get in touch with your local branch of NO2ID, a single-issue national organisation set up specifically to oppose this scheme:
http://www.no2id.net/localGroups/index.php
If you register on the site, you'll also get the excellent bi-monthly email newsletter.
12. bill okeefe
a nice neat number tatooed on our right forarm would be cheaper than ID
cards
13. Inquisitor
I know this won't be published as I utterly oppose the ID Card proposals. We have come all this way through history including two World Wars and apart from the wartime need for ID we have not reqiuired identity cards, until know. What a load of rubbish is coming out of supposedly intellectual and "clever" people. The project will fail because not only is the technology flawed as is the reasoning but the human factor will ensure it's demise. The Austrailians rejected ID cards as did the Americans and Canadians. As for terrorism protection? excuse me? how many attacks have there been in this country since 9/11???? None. We had more succesful attacks by the IRA during the eighties and no-one wanted to rush ID cards in then!!
The other bits such as fraud and immigration etc were tacked on as a sop to gain approval. It will never work. It didn't in Spain or Germany with the Basque separatists and the Bader Meinoff groups. Italy's ID Card is only a means of identifcation and not compulsory neither has it any attached database.
No! this ID card is a smoke-screen for the real intent of the Government to build a database for a "big Brother" police state to stife protest and later find who they want where they want.
Just remember these words and look them up in a years time.
14. Concerned of Surrey
This bill is not about security.
It is another plank of the erosion of our privacy and liberty.
We have detention without trial. If we add the ID card and satellite tracking of every car journey, the power is there to be abused.
Iraq showed we must be more careful whom we trust.
The state should exist to serve the will of the people, and not vice versa.
Better security will only be acheived by building stronger communities and a sense of responsibility in our youth.
Plastic cards will address the symptoms, but not the problem.
15. anonymous
A VERY BIG BROTHER INDEED I.D. CARDS
THE BRITISH POPULATION IS SLEEP-WALKING INTO A TRULY HORRIBLE SITUATION IN SUPPORTING 4 TO 1 THE BIOMETRIC I.D. CARD. IF THEY THINK IT IS JUST A NICE SHINY PERSONAL ENTITLEMENT CARD AND DEFENCE AGAINST THE “BADDIES” THEY WILL BE VERY SURPRISED.
THE CARD’S BIOMETRIC INFORMATION WILL NEED TO BE SCANNED REGULARLY FOR THERE TO BE ANY POINT IN IT. SCANNED AT THE DOCTORS SCANNED AT THE POST OFFICE ETC.
YES, IT WILL BE A HANDY PIECE OF IDENTIFICATION TO OPEN A CREDIT CARD ACCOUNT OR ACTIVATE ANY NUMBER OF FINANCIAL OR MEDICAL SERVICES. THE TROUBLE IS, ALL THESE ORGANISATIONS WILL HAVE TO SCAN YOUR CARD WITH THE GOVERNMENT’S CENTRAL DATABASE TO CONFIRM IT‘S AUTHENTICITY. EVERY TIME YOU APPLY FOR A CREDIT CARD OR GO TO THE HOSPITAL THERE WILL BE A RECORD IN ONE CENTRAL DATABASE. THE TIMES AND PLACES OF EVERY CITIZEN’S MOVEMENTS.
YOU BORROW A BOOK FROM THE LOCAL LIBRARY, ATTEND A NIGHT CLASS OR OPPOSE A PLANNING APPLICATION, THE HANDY ID CARD WILL ENTITLE YOU TO THE SERVICE. YOU VISIT THE DOCTOR, USE THE BANK, AND IT’S NUMBER AND IRIS DATA WILL ALL BE SCANNED TO THE CENTRAL DATABASE TO VERIFY YOUR ENTITLEMENT. WITH EVERY SCAN THERE WILL BE A RECORD OF WHEN AND WHERE AND WHY THAT SCAN TOOK PLACE.
HOW LONG WILL IT BE BEFORE THIS, OR ANY GOVERNMENT IN THE FUTURE, ARGUES THAT ALL OUR FINANCIAL TRANSACTIONS MUST BE TRANSPARENT IN ORDER TO FIGHT CRIME AND TERRORISM. IT SEEMS UNACCEPTABLE NOW BUT HOW UNACCEPTABLE WOULD MASS CCTV COVERAGE HAVE SEEMED TWENTY YEARS AGO?
I SHUDDER WHEN I HERE ANOTHER FOOL SAY, “YOU ARE OK IF YOU HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE”. HOW WOULD THEY FEEL WITH A CCTV CAMERA IN THEIR BEDROOM ? YES, IT SEEMS A RIDICULOUS ARGUMENT TO USE, BUT IF THESE PEOPLE HAVE NOTHING TO HIDE, WHY WORRY? NO, IT SIMPLY ILLUSTRATES THAT WE ALL HAVE A RIGHT TO PRIVACY AND THE”NOTHING TO HIDE” BRIGADE ARE SIMPLY TRYING TO JUSTIFY HOW MUCH CAN BE TAKEN AWAY FROM US. . JUST BECAUSE I DO NOT WISH TO ALLOW THIS AND ANY FUTURE GOVERNMENT TO MONITOR MY LIFE DOES NOT MAKE ME A CROOK.. ARE WE AS A NATION GOING TO ALLOW AN INCREASINGLY AUTHORITARIAN GOVERNMENT AND A LIMP OPPOSITION IMPOSE DANGEROUS LEVELS OF SURVEILLANCE ON EVERY CITIZEN WITH THIS I.D. DATABASE.
THE GOVERNMENT WILL TRY TO SEDUCE AND FRIGHTEN IT’S CITIZENS WITH CONVINCING ARGUEMENTS OF PROTECTING US FROM ID FRAUD, NHS FRAUD, ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION AND TERRORISM. THERE IS LITTLE EVIDENCE TO SHOW ANY OF THESE THREATS CAN BE WIPED OUT WITH AN I.D. CARD AND EVEN IF THEY COULD, IS IT REALLY WORTH THIS LEVEL OF STATE INTRUSION IN TO OUR PRIVATE LIVES?.
COMBINE SATELITE TRACKING IN CARS WITH FACE RECOGNITION CCTV (ALREADY USED IN NEWHAM) AND A BIOMETRIC I.D. CARD DATABASE, AND YOU HAVE A TRULY FRIGHTENING LEVEL OF STATE SURVEILLANCE IN PLACE FOR THIS AND ANY FUTURE GOVERNMENT TO USE AND ABUSE.
PLEASE DON’T SLEEP WALK INTO THIS DANGEROUS SITUATION. FOLLOW THE EXAMPLE OF AUSTRALIA . 75% OF THEIR POPULATION SUPPORTED THEIR GOVERNMENT’S I.D.CARD PLANS, THE SAME NUMBER AS THIS COUNTRY. THEN THE TRUE CONSEQUENCES OF THE ACCOMPANYING DATABASE BECAME UNDERSTOOD AND THE AUSTRALIAN PEOPLE CHANGED THEIR MINDS AND BOOTED THE IDEA OUT.
WRITE LETTERS, COMPLAIN TO YOUR M.P., CALL PHONE-IN PROGRAMMES, AND STOP THIS THING BEFORE IT STARTS.
16. R. Bencheikh
This will be labour's 1st poll tax. I do support the introduction of ID cards. I have nothing to hide. However, the government should subsidise it and offset the cost against a reduction in benefit fraud and crime. Do they pay for them in other countries?
http://www.thebiometrix.com