lemon garden

On this interesting round-up of British blogs, the author comments that there don’t seem to be any bloggers who are actually putting the case for identity cards.

For the uninitiated, the UK Government has just brought forward a bill to introduce Identity Cards. These would initially be voluntary but eventually compulsory, and would incorporate some sort of biometric information. Britain has not had a national identity card since Churchill abolished them after the second world war.

It occured to me that I, being opposed to the introduction of ID Cards, only ever read things that reflect my own views on this matter. For example, this excellent post and numerous articles on The Register. But only encountering people who agree with you is bad for the soul. So I decided to go to the horse’s mouth and read the Government’s case for ID Cards. I present it here, to redress the blogging balance.

Intriguingly, the ID Cards pages are located in the “Community & Race” section of the Home Office website. I’d have thought they’d be under “Crime & Policing” - but then I see that the curiously named “Animal Procedures” section is also under Community and Race, so what do I know?

And so, to the detail.

Apparently an ID Card will give me an easy and secure way of demonstrating my right to reside in Britain and of asserting my place in the community. To be honest, I’m not sure what “asserting my place in the community” means. So far in my life, nobody has ever queried my right to be here. I’m a bit disturbed that my “right to be here” is an issue at all. Where else would I go?

Anyway, the argument for introducing ID Cards appears to be that the scheme would bring the following benefits:

• Tackle illegal working: Once the card is made compulsory, which will happen at an unspecified time in the future, everyone resident for more than 3 months will be required to register. For foreign nationals, the card will indicate their status in the country. This makes it easier for honest employers to ensure they aren’t employing illegal workers. Unless, of course, the job is for less than 3 months and the person claims to have just arrived in the country. The Home Office also says the scheme will make “enforcement activity against unscrupulous employers more effective”, but they don’t say how.
• Tackle immigration abuse: They don’t go into any details as to how - except, I suppose, that it will be more difficult for those illegal immigrants to hoodwink honest employers into giving them a job.
• Disrupt the use of false and multiple identities in crime and terrorism: Once the scheme is compulsory (at some unspecified point in the future), almost everyone will be registered with their unique biometric information recorded on the database. Assuming that the biometric technology is robust and reliable, this makes it difficult for someone who is already registered to fraudulantly obtain a card in someone else’s name. It also make forging the cards somewhat more complicated. Furthermore, so long as financial transactions require that identity cards be produced and checked against the National Identity Register and the biometric information of the person presenting the card is scanned and checked against the card, using a false identity would become much more difficult.
• Help protect people from identity fraud: Once the card is compulsory and becomes the only accepted means of establishing identity - and so long as credit companies require it to be presented and checked against the National Identity Register, and the applicant appears in person so their biometric information can be scanned and compared to the card - then profiting from identity fraud would become very difficult. Mind you, making an online loan application will also become very difficult.
• Improve public confidence: Er … if we can convince people that ID Cards make them safer, then they will be happier. And we all want to be happy, don’t we?
• Strengthen our security: Er … well, as mentioned above, some activities related to identity fraud may become more difficult.
• Ensure free public services are only used by those entitled to them: Er … there is no information as to how it will do this.
• Enable easier and more convenient access to public services: Er …. again, there is no information as to how ID Cards will do this.

So, that’s the case for ID Cards.

There are also some notes on what the proposals mean in practice:

• ID Cards will be in addition to existing identity documents and will eventually be made compulsory.
• It may be that, when they become compulsory, they will be the only accepted way of proving your identity.
• When they become compulsory, it may be that you won’t be able to access public services (apart from in emergencies) without producing your card. However this requirement will be decided on a service by service basis.
• It will not be compulsory to carry a card.
• Both public and private sector organisations will be able to run checks against the National Identity Register that underpins the ID Card.
• The scheme will apply to anyone in the UK for longer than three months.
• The overall costs of the scheme are not stated, so far as I can see. According to the BBC, the Home Office has refused to disclose the costs of setting up the Identity Card scheme on the grounds of commercial sensitivity!
• The costs of the scheme will be covered by charging for the card.

There you go, that’s the Government’s proposal for a scheme of national identity cards.

I’m not convinced.