| After many years of discussion through successive governments, in 2003 the British Home Secretary David
Blunkett announced that the government intends to introduce a British national identity card linked to a national identity database, the National Identity Register, which will track all residents of the UK throughout their lives.
The cards and database will record biometric data, including fingerprints,
digitised facial scan & iris scan. It is expected that by 2013 up to 80% of the working
population will have some kind of biometric identity document, with the cards becoming compulsory then.
Although the focus of the proposal is on the identity cards themselves, not least in the title of the Bill, it is the National Identity Register database that is the
key component. Due to the data stored on the Register, cards will not be essential to establish identity, since all that will be
required will be to submit to a biometric scan.
Legislative progress
The Identity Cards Bill was included in the Queen's Speech
on November 23, 2004, and introduced to
the House of Commons on November 29.
It was first voted on by Members of Parliament following
the second reading of the bill on December 20, 2004, where it passed by 385 votes to 93. The bill was
opposed by 19 Labour MPs, 10 Conservative MPs, and the Liberal Democrats, while a number of Labour and
Conservative members abstained, in defiance of party policies. A separate vote on a proposal to reject the Bill was defeated by
306 votes to 93. Charles Clarke, the new Home Secretary, had earlier
rejected calls to postpone the reading of the Bill following his recent appointment.
The third reading of the bill in the Commons was approved on February 11, 2005 by 224 votes to
64; a majority of 160. Although being in favour in principle, the Conservatives officially abstained, but 11 of their MPs joined
19 labour MPs in voting against the Government. The Bill now passes to the House of Lords, however there is speculation that there may be insufficient time to debate it before the
next General Election, widely
expected to be held in May 2005.
Public reaction
The announcement of the scheme followed a public consultation, particularly among 'stakeholder groups' pdf (http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/docs3/reia_241104.pdf). At March 2003 the overall results
were:
- in favour: 2606 responses (61%)
- against: 1587 responses (38%)
- neutral: 48 responses (1%)
However the government has been criticised for ignoring the overwhelming majority of those replying who stated that they did
not want national identity cards. The government claimed that over five thousand negative online responses through a single
portal site [1] (http://www.stand.org.uk/) represented one lobby group so treated them as one reply.
National opinion polls suggest that the public are generally supportive of the scheme in principle if the Cards are
free. However a majority also believe that their data will be illegally disclosed and nearly half are unwilling to pay the
initial estimate of the fee: £35. More recent estimates from the Home Office
place the cost of a 10-year passport and ID card package at £85.
In addition the polls consistently predict that around three million people would refuse any ID Card on principle. The general
trend of the polls is that the more detail people are given about the plan the less they support it.
Public opinion on the issue varies considerably across the UK. The 2004 State of the Nation poll [2] (http://www.jrrt.org.uk/SoNSummary.pdf) by the Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust showed that opinion in Scotland
was far less supportive than that in the rest of the UK.
Despite the legislative progress being made and the concerns of the Information Commissioner detailed below, as of
February 2005 the kind of public protest that accompanied certain other legislation, such as the 2004 ban on hunting and the Poll tax has been
noticably absent, and media coverage has been
low key.
Privacy concerns
Privacy campaigners have raised concerns over the uses to which the national database might be put. Intended uses so far
discussed by ministers have included countering illegal
immigration (for which ethnic minorites will need to be frequently asked to produce their ID) and health tourism where the government hopes to save £50 million a year.
The unique National Identity Numbers would potentially make possible the creation of a massive virtual database including the
Police DNA database, GCHQ
electronic surveillance database and phone & internet surfing records. Civil servants and foreign secret services would
potentially be able to access and search through comprehensive files on every person resident in the UK, including current and
previous jobs and addresses, tax and finances, family relationships, health, and religious or political affiliations. With the
additional integration of information from CCTV
facial recognition systems
[3] (http://www.computerweekly.com/articles/article.asp?liArticleID=136743&liArticleTypeID=1&liCategoryID=2&liChannelID=22&liFlavourID=1&sSearch=&nPage=1)
and mobile phone location services, people could potentially even be tracked in real-time.
Information Commissioner
One notable voice raising serious concerns over the Government's plans has been the Government's own Information Commissioner.
In a press release on July 30, 2004 (.doc
file) (http://www.informationcommissioner.gov.uk/cms/DocumentUploads/ICO%20publishes%20concerns%20on%20identity%20cards%20-%2030.07.04.doc),
Richard Thomas stated that:
- I want to make it very clear to the public that this draft Bill is not just about an ID card, but an extensive national
identity register and the creation of a national identity registration number. Each of these raise substantial data protection
and personal privacy concerns in their own right.
- Further clarification is also needed [for] the reasons why such a large amount of information needs to be recorded as part
of establishing an individual's identity.
- I also have concerns in relation to the wide range of bodies who can view the record of what services individuals have
used. This will enable the Government and others to build up a comprehensive picture of how we live our lives. However,
individuals will not know which bodies have been accessing their personal information.
The commissioner has also pointed out that those who renew or apply for a driving licence or passport will be automatically added to
the National Identity Register, so losing the option of not registering.
In a subsequent interview in The Times newspaper of August 16, 2004 [4] (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1218615_1,00.html), the commissioner also mentioned
concerns over the children's database, the Office for National Statistics' Citizen Information Project, and the NHS National Programme for IT project, and stated that My anxiety is that we don't sleepwalk into
a surveillance society, and drew a parallel to the way that
governments in Eastern Europe and Spain gained too much power and information in the 20th
century.
As long ago as February 2003, on BBC
Radio 4's Today programme, he warned that ID cards could
become a target for organised crime to steal identities and access
their confidential details, adding that We are dealing with matters touching on the very nature of the society in which we
live.
Human Rights
On February 2, 2005, Parliament's Joint Committee on Human Rights questioned the compatability of the Bill with Article
8 of the European Convention on
Human Rights (the right to respect for private life) and Article 14 (the right to non-discrimination) [5] (http://europa.eu.int/idabc/en/document/3861/194).
Ethnic minorities
The Government's Race Equality Impact Assessment pdf (http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/docs3/reia_241104.pdf) indicates that there is significant
concern among some ethnic groups over how the Police would use their
powers under the act, with 64% of black and 53% of Indian respondents expressing concern, particularly about the potential
for abuse and discrimination. In their January 2005
report doc (http://www.cre.gov.uk/downloads/docs/id_cards.doc) on the Bill, the Commission for Racial Equality state that the
fear of discrimination is neither misconceived nor exaggerated, and note that this is also an ongoing issue in Germany, the Netherlands and France.
The CRE are also concerned that disproportionate requirement by employers and the authorities for ethnic minorities to
identify themselves may create a two tiered structure amongst racial groups, with foreign nationals and British ethnic minorities
feeling compelled to register while British white persons do not. They also comment that the impact on those who have been living
and working illegally in the UK for many years would entrench an underclass,
undermining community cohesion.
According to the CRE, certain groups who move location frequently and who tend to live on low incomes (such as gypsies, travellers,
asylum-seekers and refugees)
risk of being criminalised under the legislation through failing to update their registration each time they move due to lack of
funds to pay the fee that may be charged.
Vulnerable individuals
The CRE have also recommended that more work is required to protect the interests of vulnerable individuals. For example,
women escaping a violent partner or a forced marriage may be at risk if
their previous names or addresses are disclosed.
Identity theft
Security experts have claimed that placing trust in a single document may make identity theft easier, since only this document needs to be targeted [6] (http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000102&sid=a7DltmImQUYE). Obtaining such a
'secure' identity becomes very valuable, while people are much less likely to question its validity. And due to the supposed
security of the system, proving that your identity has been stolen could prove problematic.
While new applications could be made using false documentation, existing cards and database entries would also be targets.
Apart from the tampering or superficial forging of biometric identity cards, the database would make an attractive target for
computer hackers, and any system involving human
operaters is liable to infiltration or the bribery or blackmail of staff.
Technology
Elsewhere, doubts remain concerning the practicability of the scheme, relying on unproven technologies such as iris scanning,
and even the very best system will be liable to a small error rate.
Costs
The expected cost of the scheme has doubled to £5.5 billion in six
months
[7] (http://www.computerweekly.com/articles/article.asp?liArticleID=136730&liArticleTypeID=1&liCategoryID=2&liChannelID=22&liFlavourID=1&sSearch=&nPage=1).
Setting out a detailed case against the ID cards in a report by Peter
Lilley MP, the centre-right think tank the Bow Group suggested that the costs could easily double pdf (http://www.bowgroup.org/pub/IDCards.pdf). A number of other major government IT projects have
been expensive failures yet none are as complex as the ID card scheme.
Effectiveness
The Bow Group are also of the opinion that ID cards offer a "largely illusory solution"; police have problems proving people
guilty, not identifying suspects; terrorists normally conceal their intentions rather than their identities; benefit fraudsters
usually misrepresent their circumstances, not who they are; and all illegal immigrants can, and most do, claim asylum whereupon
they are already required to have an identity card containing their finger prints and photo.
David Blunkett himself stated that "ID Cards won't stop terrorism".
Other doubts
Amongst other arguments, opponents of ID cards have compared the scheme with the Nazi database for identifying Jews and their
tattooing of prisoners for identification purposes in the Nazi concentration camps [8] (http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/tattoos1.html).
The scheme
The latest interest in the scheme by David Blunkett followed the September 11, 2001 Terrorist Attack on the New York World Trade Center, but was generally
opposed by Cabinet colleagues.
As a result of the opposition, by February 2002 the original proposal had been
downgraded to an "entitlement card", to be used to obtain social
security services. However ongoing discussions led to the inclusion of the original national identity scheme in the November 2003 Queen's Speech, despite doubts over the
ability of the scheme to prevent terrorism (Government polling indicated that the term 'entitlement card' was superficially softer and
warmer, but less familiar and ‘weasely’, and conseqeuntly the euphamism was dropped in favour of identity cards).
According to the government pdf (http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/docs3/reia_241104.pdf), the scheme is designed to help deliver
the following outcomes:
- - less illegal migration and illegal working; and better community relations as a result;
- - an enhancement to the UK’s capability to counter terrorism and serious and organised crime;
- - reduced identity fraud;
- - speedier, more convenient access to public services and services to consumers more widely.
The scheme will apply to all British nationals resident in the UK and to all foreign nationals resident in the country for
more than three months.
National Identity Register
Key to the ID Card scheme will be a centralised computer database, the National Identity Register (NIR). To identify someone
it will not be necessary to check their card, since identity would be determined by a taking a biometric scan and matching it
against a database entry.
According to the published legislation, the database will record the following information for each UK resident:
- Personal information:
- - full name;
- - other names by which he is or has been known;
- - date of birth;
- - place of birth;
- - gender;
- - principal UK place of residence;
- - every other UK place of residence;
- - past places of UK and overseas residence during a prescribed period.
- Identifying information:
- - head and shoulder photograph;
- - signature;
- - fingerprints;
- - other biometric information.
- Residential status:
- - nationality;
- - entitlement to remain in the United Kingdom;
- - the terms and conditions of leave to enter or remain in the UK, if applicable.
- Personal reference numbers etc:
- - National Identity Registration Number;
- - the number of any ID card issued;
- - any national insurance number;
- - the number of any immigration document;
- - the number of any United Kingdom passport;
- - the number of any non-UK passport;
- - the number of any document that can be used instead of a passport;
- - the number of any overseas identity card;
- - any reference number in connection with an application to enter or to remain in the UK;
- - the number of any work permit;
- - any driving licence number;
- - the number of any other designated document;
- - the date of expiry or period of validity of a document listed above.
- Record history:
- - previous records of the above information;
- - changes affecting the above information and changes made to the Register entry;
- - date of death.
- Registration and ID card history:
- - the date of every application for registration;
- - the date of every application for a modification of the registry entry;
- - the date of every application confirming the contents of the registry entry;
- - the reason for any omission from the information recorded;
- - particulars (in addition to its number) of every ID card issued;
- - whether each such card is in force and, if not, why not;
- - particulars of every person who has countersigned an application;
- - particulars of every notification given by him (lost, stolen and damaged cards, etc);
- - particulars of every requirement to surrender an ID card.
- Validation information:
- - the information provided in connection with every application or modification;
- - the information provided in connection with every registry entry confirmation;
- - the steps taken to identify the applicant or verify the information provided;
- - any other steps or information used to ensure a complete, up-to-date, accurate entry;
- - particulars of every notification given by that individual.
- Security information:
- - a PIN used in connection with
applications or information provision;
- - a password used for the above purpose;
- - questions and answers to be used for security when applying or modifying information.
- Records of provision of information:
- - particulars of every occasion on which the registry entry has been accessed;
- - particulars of every person to whom such information has been provided;
- - other particulars asscociated with the registry access.
Failure to inform the Government of a change of address or other personal details will result in a fine of £1000, while the
fine for refusing to register or failing to submit to scanning will be £2500. Perhaps most controversially of all individuals
will have no right to see or correct information held about them on the NIR.
Many people argue that the NIR is more of a threat to privacy and civil liberties than the ID Cards themselves, not necessarily because of the
information held in the database, but because of the potential for a wide range of bodies to cross-reference information on other
databases.
Currently, the closest parallel to the National
Identity Register is the requirement for convicted offenders to register on the Violent and Sex Offender Register.
Voluntary vs Compulsory
The current proposals are for a two-stage scheme. ID cards will be introduced on a voluntary basis, coming to be compulsory at
a later date. Controversially, the move to compulsion does not currently require further primary legislation. That
is, a minister will able to impose compulsion using delegated legislation.
However a number of bodies have pointed out that many people will not have this option. While agreeing that the scheme
could make a significant contribution to achieving the aims set out for it by the Government [9] (http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200304/cmselect/cmhaff/130/13010.htm), among their
criticisms the Select Committee on Home Affairs pointed out that anyone neededing a new passport or driving licence
would be automatically added to the National Identity Register, and therefore to describe the first phase of the Government's
proposals as 'voluntary' stretches the English language to breaking point [10] (http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200304/cmselect/cmhaff/130/13007.htm).
Trials
In January 2004, a six-month trial of the
biometric technology began, organised by the United Kingdom Passport Service. It was expected that 10,000 people will be
involved in the trials, the cost of which was not disclosed.
Problems with the technology forced the Passport Service to cut the trial down to three months. Opponents to the government's
plans criticised this cut as reducing the efficacy of the trial.
The trials indicate that at present no one technology is sufficiently robust to reliably identify people, and that
consequently it is likely that fingerprint, iris and facial features will all be measured, although whether this will lead to
greater reliability has been questioned
[11] (http://www.computerweekly.com/articles/article.asp?liArticleID=134320&liArticleTypeID=1&liCategoryID=2&liChannelID=22&liFlavourID=1&sSearch=&nPage=1)
Universal children's database
Under the provisions of the Children Act 2004, the Government plan to create a Universal Child Database of all children living in the UK. While the aim is to help the
authorities to identify and protect children at risk from abuse or neglect,
some critics have claimed that it is a proto-national identity database.
Historical national identity cards
Compulsory identity cards were first issued in the United Kingdom during World
War I, and abandoned in 1919.
Cards were re-introduced during World War II under the National
Registration Act 1939, but were abandoned seven years after the end of that war in 1952, amid widespread public resentment. Opposition reached its peak with the 1951 court case of Willcock v Muckle, after Clarence Henry Willcock refused to produce his identity card. The judge in the case said that the
cards were an "annoyance" and "tended to turn law-abiding subjects into law breakers".
Wartime cards were a temporary measure to combat a obvious threat and didn't collect information on people through a central
database.
External links
News stories
- Dec 2004 Guardian Legal advice on ID cards kept
secret (http://www.guardian.co.uk/idcards/story/0,15642,1377360,00.html)
- Dec 2004 Guardian If you value your freedom, reject this
sinister ID card (http://www.guardian.co.uk/idcards/story/0,15642,1375858,00.html)
- Apr 2004 Times It is right to experiment with identity
cards (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,542-1089392,00.html)
- Apr 2004 Bloomberg Identity Card
Will Make Fraud Easier (http://quote.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=10000102&sid=a7DltmImQUYE&refer=uk)
- Apr 2004 Scotsman Charles Clarke: Id Cards Will Protect Youngsters from
Paedophiles (http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=2844122)
- Jul 2003 Statewatch Identity cards in the UK - a lesson from
history (http://www.statewatch.org/news/2003/jul/26ukid.htm)
- Jul 2002 Daily Telegraph £70 ID card to
combine passport and car licence (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2002/07/04/ncard04.xml)
- Sep 2001 Guardian ID cards might solve asylum
crisis (http://society.guardian.co.uk/asylumseekers/story/0,7991,547696,00.html)
Guides
Opposition groups
Alternative solutions
|
