Jun
2010
Why I love(d) my UK National Identity Card
OK. So I have a passport and didn’t need to have a national identity card to travel in Europe. But I wanted one, so I registered my interest in 2009 and waited until Feb 2010.
In February I was invited (not forced) to go to the UK Home Office IPS with my completed application form, my reference from my Police Constable friend and of course the £30 fee. I waited for my interview where I had my finger prints taken and my picture taken for the national identity register. All good and the very next day my card arrived. Perfect, easy and with no fuss my biometric card which is valid for travel in the European Union was safely in my wallet.
The main reason for me wanting a card was just that in Spain (where I live in Valencia working for H&K in London) every time you pay by debit or credit card you have to show your ID. Previously this has meant that I had to carry my passport with me everywhere which I hated doing as it was large, it was getting damaged and it wasn’t convenient for me. I know some of you will say … what about your driving licence? Well I am one of the very few 40 year olds that doesn’t have a licence as I never learned to drive and think £30 is a great deal cheaper than having lessons and taking a test! 
… and a lot less hassle.
So last week when the new UK coalition Government put my lovely ID card on death row, I shed a tear. OK, maybe that is a bit of an exaggeration but I was genuinely upset. The Government had scrapped something I wanted and volunteered to get in the name of giving more power to the UK electorate. Erm… I wanted my card Mr Clegg & Mr Cameron…. I am a UK voter and I volunteered my details and paid my money and wanted my card! It made my life easier and I have nothing to hide by submitting my details to be kept on a register. God only knows the UK Government probably knows more about me that what was being kept on the national identity register anyway and I have nothing to hide!
Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Finland, France, Germany, Gibraltar, Greece, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Italy, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Malta, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland all have some form of national identity card that can be used for travel across the European Economic Area (EEA). Why not the UK? Why scrap a scheme that cost between £12-18bn (LSE study) to introduce and was voluntary for anyone in the UK. Issue between 100-200,000 cards to UK citizens at £30 a go only to scrap the scheme about eight months later. Why not make it a voluntary ID for people and give THEM the choice of having one or not. Surely that would have been far more democratic?
So I am left with less than 100 days left of use on a card I wanted, I volunteered for, not to mention paying for and will get no refund for! I will keep it as a souvenir of a mad Government for cancelling it and not just keeping it as a voluntary scheme. Who knows, maybe by the time it expires in Feb 2020 a new Government might have reintroduced it! Or maybe it will become a collector’s item? After all, even on conservative estimates regarding the number issued I make mine valued about £50,000 to produce and issue.
Should the national identity card in the UK remained a voluntary card? Was it an infringement of civil liberties or was it just another convenient easy to use document issued by a national Government and did the new incoming coalition scrap it just to make a point to the opposition Labour party about the new kids being on the block?
What do you think? I would be interested to hear your views.
Jun
2010
Tweets that mention H&K London's Blog » Blog Archive » Why I love(d) my UK National Identity Card -- Topsy.com
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Tim Fallon, Jason Frayne. Jason Frayne said: Why I love(d) my UK national identity card & will miss it when it is scrapped in less than 100 days! http://bit.ly/bLAgU6 [...]
Jun
2010
Rick
The Coalition has a clear popular mandate for scrapping ID cards. Even when pundits were predicting a Conservative outright victory – back in February when you chose to buy a card – there was an expectation that the cards would be scrapped.
So you chose to take a £30 risk when the only circumstances under which your card would remain valid would be in the unlikely event of a Labour victory.
Did you have your head in the sand? Are you bitter that Labour lost? Or are you really that upset about the £30?
Had the Coalition kept ID cards as a voluntary scheme, it would have left the door open to compulsion – which they clearly did not want. If you think that’s squandering an investment, perhaps you should consider the wisdom of the previous government’s decision to make that investment without cross-party support?
The issue with ID cards has never been around the object itself, but the database behind it. You may recall that the civil service has a particularly poor record in safeguarding citizen’s data in this country. Scrapping the database alone would render ID cards useless. Leaving the database in place would require maintenance and security in the face of multiple manifesto commitments, public opinion and the tightest public spending round since the 1950s.
Your post is naive in so many ways I’m actually surprised I could be bothered to comment.
Jun
2010
Jason Frayne
Hi Rick, thank for your post.
Of course I knew the risk in applying and am certainly not upset about losing £30 and not upset about Labour being defeated in the election either. What I am upset about, and I think I made this clear but apologies if not, is losing the use of something I personally found useful and convenient with no issue with the Government of the day holding many of my personal detail on their database as I had nothing to hide when voluntarily supplying them.
A voluntary scheme is different to a compulsory scheme and I would agree with you that a compulsory scheme would throw up many more worries and questions. I also agree with some of your points around safeguarding citizen’s data and the tight public spending round, but with regard to the database, I believe I am right in thinking the database for non UK/EU citizens is staying in place with all the data collected still live, with the associated costs with keeping this database running and secure? What I was suggesting was the data being held for the lifetime of the card and then deleted. Then I would have got what I paid for and could still use until 2020, the scheme could stay voluntary and on expiry the data deleted leaving myself and the Government happy.
I am sorry that you find my post naive but I do appreciate you taking the time to responding and stimulating the debate. Jason
Jun
2010
Rick
Jason, thanks for replying.
I refer you to http://www.ips.gov.uk/cps/rde/xchg/ips_live/hs.xsl/1690.htm
which makes clear that the cards, the register and the role of the Identity Commissioner are all to be scrapped.
Unless you have registered with the UK Border Agency scheme for foreign nationals – which is a different database – I’m afraid your details will be destroyed securely within a few months.
The point of scrapping the entire scheme, rather than allowing a voluntary scheme to persist, is that it makes any future attempt to bring in a new ID card scheme much more expensive. Which is obviously what you want if you’re opposed to ID cards.
Jun
2010
Jason Frayne
It is interesting that the Government are happy to treat foreign nationals data in a different way to handling our own. Surely any argument regarding civil liberties and human rights should include them too? I am also dubious as to how much money will be saved by just scrapping just the UK/EU data while maintaining a database containing foreign national data. I am sure they weren’t totally separate systems running totally independently, or were they?
I do have another question to throw into the mix to stimulate further debate. When a foreign national who has lived in the UK for many years applies to becomes a UK citizen, which is possible. Is there data then automatically deleted from the database and their card details made invalid?
Anyway, I digress from my initial and albeit light-hearted post of losing a card that I actually found to be useful and convenient. Clearly I am in favour of an ID card scheme and you are opposed to one which I totally respect. I wonder if there will be any way of checking that my data held on the national identity register has truly been deleted in the two months after the bill scrapping the scheme receives royal ascent?
Jun
2010
Rick
Jason,
It’s an interesting point. If they’re scrapping the role of Identity Commisioner, it’s unclear who you should ask about the staus of your data! Presumably you should revert to the Information Commissioner, whose remit might be extended in this regard. I’m sure the issue will be addressed by the time the Bill is taken for Assent.
Jun
2010
Simon Evans
Interesting exchange of views. Some clarifications are in order.
It is possible to have an ID card system without the proposed National Identity Register. Germany has just such a system; indeed German law says it is illegal to keep records of card usage. Obviously a database is needed of the basic card data so that cards can be reissued if lost, stolen expired etc. It is less clear if it is necessary to have biometric records of the sort beloved of the IPS. Most of us opposed to the system that is to be scrapped were against a database of usage, not the cards themselves. The government insisted that all records of usage were kept forever, and could be interrogated by nameless and faceless snoops without the cardholder knowing. It is this unjustifiable Orwellian aspect of the proposal that was so hated.
The reason for keeping a record of transaction usage was originally so that cardholders could verify card usage online and make sure their card had not been misused. But the civil servants behind the system design hijacked this idea.
In fact, the National Identity Register would never have had many entries, as there was no budget for buying terminals, and the private sector was not interested in paying for a terminal plus 70 pence a time to verify individuals were who they said they were. There are cheaper and more effective ways of doing this. Even other ministries, who were all intended to equip themselves with terminals to check citizens’ ID, sat on their hands and refused even to think about changing their systems to interface with the NIR.
The IPS wanted to be the arbiter of identity. In its dreams it was the only supplier of identity cards, and the only decider of who a person really was. It wanted to interpose itself in every transaction where one party wanted anther party to prove that he was who he claimed to be.
The public did not like such an approach, especially as the system was to be implemented using a design that would have looked old fashioned in the 1980s. For this the many consultants they employed should hang their heads in shame.
It should also be noted that the UK ID card addressed very few current problems of identification. In particular it offered no help in verifying identity online. A strange omission.
The UKBA’s system for foreign nationals is similar to, but different from, the UK ID system. The card they issue is more like an American Green Card, in being a sort of visa that is external to the person’s passport. The only reason for this that I can see was the desire to incorporate biometric information that may not be on the person’s passport (as hardly any foreign passports yet include such information).
Sir Joseph Pilling, the information Commissioner, will have his office (which cost £50,000 a month) closed down with immediate effect. If you want proof that the data relating to ID cards have been destroyed you must rely on the probity of the Home Office. This is not very satisfactory, but I suppose it is possible that Sir Joseph (who never wanted the job anyway) might be persuaded to have a look and see that the records really have gone.
Jun
2010
Jason Frayne
Hi Simon
Thanks for your post and clarification. I appreciate that many were not opposed to the card itself but more to the database and who would have access to it etc. and I agree with your point on lack of ability to verify anyone’s identity online. Something that you would have thought would have been front of mind for the developers in the twenty first century!
It’s a shame that what could have been a simple and possibly useful system of a national identity card for some, that indeed does work in other EU countries perfectly well, had become overly expensive, overbearing and ultimately lead to it being cancelled in the UK.
I also agree with you that many consultants involved in the failed project should be hanging their heads in shame.