By Nick Heath, 15 April 2009 15:31
NEWS
L is for Legal battle
In February 2009 the government lost a four-year-long battle to block the publication of internal reviews of the ID cards project.
The two Gateway reviews, completed in 2003 and 2004, by the Office of Government Commerce (OGC) into the likely success of the ID cards scheme, were published on 20 March 2009.
The 2003 report warned of several risks of the scheme, including the perceived benefits of the project "not [being] on a scale to justify the costs" as well as the "erosion of public support for the scheme".
As part of this, the police said that proceeding with the project without any obligation for citizens to carry or produce the cards "would substantially remove the administrative savings and some of the other advantages that identity cards would offer".
Technology also featured on the OGC's list of concerns: the review described "unexpected data problems" as "an ever-present danger" and warned that poor systems architecture could lead to higher costs.
The publication of the reports was ordered by the Information Tribunal, which rejected the government's argument that they must remain confidential to protect future Gateway reviews.
The tribunal's decision came after anti-ID card campaign group No2ID member, Mark Dziecielewski, won the right to have the reviews published after his Freedom of Information request to see the reports was upheld by the information commissioner in 2006.
The commissioner's decision was supported by the Information Tribunal in 2007 following an appeal by the Office of Government Commerce. The OGC subsequently appealed the tribunal's verdict in the High Court, which in 2008 overturned the tribunal's decision to publish the reviews.
Comments
There are 9 comments. Join the discussion
1. anonymous
Horatio Nelson to Captain Hardy; 'How can a man in my condition qualify for one of these ID cards given that my biometric information is going to be incomplete?'
Hardy; 'To bad My Lord, you will not be eligible for one of these cards.'
Nelson; 'Right Hardy, if that's how they wan't it I'll go and fight for the French! Will you come with me?'
Hardy; 'Yes, My Lord.'
2. galley slave#41
SOMEONE IS GOING TO MAKE BIG MONEY OUT OF THIS!
AND YOU WILL ALL BE JOINING ME IN THE GALLEY.
BORN FREE HA! HA!
SLAVES EVERYONE!
3. Dick Vinegar
Your definition of Xenophobia is wrong. Xen... is not bothering to find out why 22 countries (400 million people) in the EU are happy with ID cards, and are not slipping into slavery.
Xen.. is having the Little British arrogance and insularity not to ask their advice about what works and what doesn't in e-ID. They have the experience. We don't.
4. anonymous
T is also for Trust. All security systems will boil down to one or more trust relationships. I have yet to see the Trust relationship definition for ID cards and how it will be managed.
You can forget me trusting ID cards until this issue is resolved.
5. Radical Meldrew
Mr Vinegar-Sarson should take care in advocating the introduction of ID cards. Whilst the basic concept is fine, we have to consider the insidious way governments retain vast amounts of data unnecessarily to just maintain the illusion of having control. Our current regime is a prime example of this, they lost the plot completely years ago but still maintain their sad pretence of being dependable! They ain't worth a carrot, that's the whole lot of 'em, whatever the party.
The irony of the ID scheme is that it will greatly assist in tracking the lawful whilst the criminal undercurrent, including illegal immigrants and terrorists, will probably remain well below the radar by their various means. ID card checks will be visual examination only until card readers are extensively (and very expensively) installed and linked to a central database - so they will be no more useful than a current passport or driving licence for quite some time to come.
I for one am deeply opposed to any form of government control-freakery, after all, this is still a democracy so they have a moral obligation to listen to the majority? Ha, no chance there!
I can easily imagine the day when new legislation is passed allowing the police to abruptly demand 'identification please' - Sad times we live in.
6. karen challinor
also in response to Mr Vinegar
400 million people in europe may carry ID cards and be ok with the idea but these id cards don't have an equivalent of the NIR backing them up and logging every time they get used or referred to, nor have they had to submit fingerprints or other biometrics ... well apart from a signature and photograph to get them not have they had to part with their life history
so I agree we haven't learned what works from the models currently in existence
7. misceng
Even the police can't keep data secure. If this can happen, think about access to the database by unvetted bank clerks, insurance agents and anyone who can get employment in these sorts of organisations.
8. Richard Davies
We're not sleep walking into anything. This stupid government are dragging UK Citizens that way against their will and simply ignoring people / organisations they shouldn't, such as the LSE etc.
No one is asking for all this to be done...the government are simply railroading their 'big idea' through even though its now so watered down its not even worth the paper the proposal is written on.
Massive Cost to tax payer and a few foreign nationals will have one! Great!
I hate the way government officials never answer your question and cleverly skirt around it...this basically means they are full of crap!
9. Adrian Tawse
Under NIR I think it would be helpful to list just all the items of nformation that will be stored. If just a small number of Civil Servamnts will have access to thjis then just why does this small number need all this information?