Home Office minister Andy Burnham said that testing would continue after the bill becomes law, which the government hopes will be by late 2005 or early 2006.
He was speaking on 25 May 2005, the day that home secretary Charles Clarke reintroduced the ID cards bill to Parliament. Its predecessor had been lost when the previous Parliament dissolved for the general election. "We're now focused on the passage of the bill through Parliament," Burnham said. "We're not second guessing the decision, but when it goes through we will begin the serious process of testing the technology and procuring systems."
Referring to the tests on biometric enrolment run by the UK Passport Service, he said: "I'm encouraged by how well it seems to have perforrmed in a non-controlled environment. The process was to make it easy for the public to go through the process of registration, and it performed pretty well.
"There are no doubts about the technology. It is being used elsewhere in the world."
He cited the examples of Hong Kong, Malaysia, the Philippines and the United Arab Emirates as countries that use biometric ID cards.
The Home Office has published a report into the UKPS biometric trials.
Burnham also said that, while the Home Office is currently citing a "unit cost" of £93 for each card, this would not necessarily be the fee charged to citizens.
"The government faces a decision later down the line on the fee structure, and this will include what the public pays," he said.
He attributed most of the unit cost to a "people intensive" process in registering people as card holders.
"We all have to be 100% sure that the data entered on the national register is the highest quality," he said. "This requires an investment in trained people to take high quality readings."
With much criticism of the plans anticipated, the government has been stressing the use of the scheme to prevent identity theft rather than using the terrorism argument, which was deployed during the last attempt to introduce the bill.
Home Office minister Tom McNulty said: "A secure national identity cards scheme would protect everyone's identity and help prepare the UK for the challenges of the 21st century.
"Across the world there is a drive to increase the security of identity documents, to safeguard borders and reduce threats from overseas. The plans set out today will ensure the UK is the forefront of that drive and making the most of the benefits for our citizens.
"Our identities are incredibly valuable to us and too easily stolen. ID fraud is a growing crime which can ruin lives and underpin illegal activities from people trafficking to credit card fraud, from abuse of our healthcare and benefits systems to terrorism.
"A secure compulsory national identity cards scheme will help tackle illegal immigration, organised crime, ID fraud, terrorism and will benefit all UK citizens."
The bill covers the whole of the UK and makes provision for:
- setting up a National Identity Register;
- ensuring that checks can be made against other databases to ensure an applicant's identity;
- creates new criminal offences on the possession of false identity documents;
- enabling powers so that future access to specified public services could be linked to production of a valid card.
It also provides a power at a future date for it become compulsory to register and be issued with a card, including penalties against failure to register.
It would not be compulsory to carry a card and there would be no new powers for the police to demand to see one.
Earlier in the week, Clarke called on the Conservative Party to drop the "fig leaf" of opposition that it had put up to cover repeated shifts in its stance on the scheme. He also offered to meet Labour MPs opposed to the legislation to discuss their concerns.
"I believe it is critically important that we do tackle the issues of identity fraud," he said. "What I hope is that we can have a rational discussion about the various issues."
Shadow home secretary David Davis warned that Conservatives would oppose ID cards unless the government could "conclusively prove" the need for them. He pointed to "extreme doubts" raised by experts about the viability of the technology, and asked why the bill was being pushed through while those questions were unanswered.
Quelle: KableNET, 26.05.2005
