Compliance Toolkit

ID card bill changes praised

Tags:
Biometrics,
Blunkett,
ID Cards

Kable

Published: 28 Oct 2004 16:44 BST

A parliamentary committee has welcomed the news that the Home Office will take independent advice on biometrics from chief scientific officer

The Home Office has improved its plans for compulsory identity cards, according to Parliament's home affairs select committee.

The committee made a large number of criticisms of the plans, in a report issued on 30 July 2004. The Home Office responded on 27 October.

On the same day, the committee's Labour chairman, former home office minister John Denham, said he saw this as "a very significant move to address the concerns raised by the select committee". He said the committee welcomed changes in six areas:

The Home Office will produce a free standing identity card, rather than combining it with other documents such as passports.

It will create a simple online verification service, with audit trail.
It will take independent advice on biometrics from the government's chief scientific adviser, following criticism that the technology will fail when faced with a database of millions.
The government will rationalise its database proposals, and drop a separate Citizen Information Project, which looked set to produce a parallel population database.
The aims of the identity card will be placed in primary legislation, in response to concerns about mission creep.
The national identity scheme commissioner will have enhanced powers, giving him or her oversight of the whole scheme.

"While there are many detailed issues still to be clarified, and further work needs to be done on costings, the government's response makes it much more likely that this essential scheme will succeed," Denham said in a statement.

"Over the coming months Parliament will want to scrutinise carefully the proposed statutory aims of the scheme, the powers of the commissioner, and the safeguards against misuse of the system. If we can get these areas of the bill right the ID card scheme can be placed on a sound legal footing."

Despite Denham's comments, the Home Office response did not fully answer some of the committee's questions. On 30 July, the committee said it was "deeply concerned" about the cost to other departments of the card and biometric readers, which are not included in the Home Office's budget of up to £3.1bn. The Home Office response of 27 October did not provide an estimate of such costs or even of the number of readers needed, with the exception of the Department of Work and Pensions which says it will need around 4,500.

The Home Office also released research on the scheme. Of the 766 responses to the official consultation earlier this year, 48 percent were opposed to the draft bill, 8 percent were supportive in principle but with some reservations, 13 percent were neutral and 31 percent were in favour. However, of general correspondence received, 31 percent was in favour while 21 percent was against.

Focus groups showed opposition to paying much or anything for identity cards. Groups who had details of the plans explained to them became "a little less enthusiastic", although still believed it should go ahead.

Polling of 3,000 people in July found that just under half the population is not confident the government will successfully introduce identity cards, while a similar number is confident.

The verdict on biometrics was confused. 65 percent thought biometrics would make the card "very effective" and 26 percent "fairly effective", but 71 percent of respondents didn't understand the term "biometric information". (The term was very briefly explained before the effectiveness question was asked.)

The polls also found that 58 percent would prefer identity cards to be a separate document, supporting one of the changes highlighted by Denham.