 |
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||||
After many years of discussion through successive governments, in 2003 Home Secretary David Blunkett announced that the British government intends to introduce national identity cards linked to a national identity database.
The cards and database will record biometric data. 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. The cost is currently estimated by the government at up to 3.1 billion pounds.
The announcement of the scheme followed a public consultation; 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 negative online responses through a single portal site 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 proposed fee of £35. 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 by the Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust showed that opinion in Scotland was far less supportive than that in the rest of the UK.
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.
The ID Card scheme will be backed up by a centralised National Identity Register (NIR). Many people argue that the NIR is more of a threat to privacy and civil liberties than the ID Cards themselves.
The NIR will contain a huge amount of information on every British citizen, including current and all previous addresses. Failure to inform the Government of a change of address or other personal details will result in a fine of £1000. There will be an audit trail that records when and where the Card was used.
Perhaps most controversially of all individuals will have no right to see or correct information held about them on the NIR.
The current proposals are for a two stage scheme. Initially the ID Card will be "voluntary" with compulsion being introduced at a later date. Controversially the move to compulsion will not require further primary legislation.
In reality the "voluntary" period will be nothing of the sort. It will be mandatory during this period to have an ID Card in order to renew a driving licence or passport - thus an estimated 80% of the UK population will be forced to have an ID Card during the "voluntary" scheme.
The Commons January 2004, a six-month trial of the biometric technology began, organised by the United Kingdom Passport Service. It is expected that 10,000 people will be involved in the trials, the cost of which is not being 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.
According to leaked cabinet minutes reported in The Times newspaper of July 25 2004 , the government has commissioned a feasibility study into the creation of a national database of all children living in the UK. The database is to contain school achievements, a record of medical consultations, police and social service records and home address. Legislation for the database is expected to be included in the Children's Bill expected in autumn 2004.
The aim is to help the authorities to identify and protect children at risk from abuse or neglect. Critics have claimed that it is a proto-national identity database.
One notable voice raising serious concerns over the government's plans for the identity card and database has been the government's own Information Commissioner.
In a press release on July 30 2004 Richard Thomas stated that:
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 , the commissioner also mentioned concerns over the children's database, the Office for National Statistics' Citizen’s Information Project, and the Department of Health's NHS database, 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.
Elsewhere, doubts remain concerning the practicability of the scheme and whether it would actually help counter terrorism, while some claim that placing trust in a single document may make identity theft easier.
Privacy campaigners have also raised concerns over the uses to which the national database might be put, especially the ability to link between the national identity database and other computer systems. Intended uses so far discussed by ministers have included countering illegal immigration and health tourism.
Database links could potentially be used to assemble a comprehensive file on a particular person, 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 and mobile phone location services a person might even be tracked in real-time. While such a information may play a useful role in countering terrorism and crime, it could also be used less benignly by a future totalitarian government or in the hands of organised crime.
Compulsory identity cards were first issued in the United Kingdom during World War I, and abandoned in 1919.
Cards were re-introduced in World War II, 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".
|
||||
| View Live Article | This article is from Wikipedia. All text is available under the terms of the GNU Free Documentation License | |
||
