The Identity Cards Bill received Royal Assent, placing on the statute book important measures which will help Britain meet the challenges of the 21st century the Government stated today. The National Identity Scheme will provide all UK residents aged over 16 with a universal, highly secure means for safeguarding their identity at a cost of about £93, payable by the individual. But the penalties for not complying are severe too. The failure to register will be punished by a maximum fine of £2,500. The failure to apply in a manner prescribed to renew your ID, or to inform the national identity register of a change of your details, or to surrender the ID card, or to notify the register of an invalid card, will all incur a maximum fine of £1,000.

The Government has also established a new agency to issue ID Cards. The new agency that will issue passports and ID cards will be called the Identity and Passport Service (IPS). Incorporating the United Kingdom Passport Service (UKPS) and working closely with the Home Office's Immigration and Nationality Directorate, it will become operational on 1 April 2006.

The Home Secretary Charles Clarke, said: "Being able to prove who we are is a fundamental requirement in modern society. Building on the experience and proven excellence of the Passport Service, the IPS will ensure the UK is at the forefront of the worldwide drive to increase document security, safeguard borders and protect identities for use by those who are entitled to them.

"I believe that the National Identity Scheme will bring major benefits. It will give UK residents an easy and convenient way to prove their identity; deter illegal immigration and illegal working; help tackle organised crime and terrorism; and provide a means to defend against the abuse of public services. At the heart of the scheme, a secure national database linking basic personal details to unique biometric information will strengthen, not erode, civil liberties by protecting individual identities."

The National Identity Scheme, to be phased in over a number of years, will link basic personal information, such as name and address, to secure biometrics - a computer image of a person's iris, face or fingerprints. These are unique and provide a hi-tech form of security for every citizen.

The new agency will be responsible for:

* issuing passports and providing passport services;

* issuing ID cards and providing the means of verifying the identity of individuals for accredited organisations;

* delivering the National Identity Scheme including the establishment of the National Identity Register; and

* promoting the use of the National Identity Scheme across the public and private sectors to improve identity management and ensure full realisation of the benefits of the scheme.

It will not be compulsory to carry a card and there will be no new powers for police to demand to see a card. However, this would be a universal scheme for everyone legally resident in the UK and, subject to further primary legislation, it will be compulsory to register on the scheme.

ID COMPROMISE IMPOSES COMPULSORY REGISTRATION

The Act includes an opt-out which means that until 1 January 2010, people applying for or renewing a passport can choose not to get an ID card, although their details will be entered on the National Identity Register. Opponents of the ID Card Scheme expressed outrage at the compromise agreed between the Government and the House of Lords on this issue on 29 March 2006. Phil Booth, NO2ID’s National Coordinator, said: “Anybody who thinks that this is compromise has not understood the Bill. The problem has always been the database, not the card."

“In Parliament round one may have gone to the government by misdirection, but in the country it’s a different story. Millions are already vehemently opposed, the Home Office will have to round them up and force them to be fingerprinted which will bring home to the public the true nature of the scheme. This is a self-destructive policy to dwarf the Poll Tax. The Government may think it has won but NO2ID has only just begun to fight.”

There are currently around 47 million British passports in circulation, with 80% of the population holding a passport. The number of applications is expected to rise to around 7 million in 2006. With the exception of the USA (8 million) this is more than any other country in the world. The UKPS will have processed a record 6.6 million passport applications in the financial 2005/06.

OPPONENTS DEBUNK ID CARD CLAIMS

Civil liberty and privacy campaigners have also challenged Mr Clarke's claims that compulsory ID cards would be "a major breakthrough" in tackling identity fraud, the cost of which they announced has risen from £1.3 to £1.7 billion. New evidence reveals that the Government’s planned ID card will expose citizens to even greater risk of having their personal data stolen and could fuel a massive increase in identity fraud.

The NO2ID campaign issued a warning after the security of the Dutch biometric passport, which uses the same RFID technology as intended for UK ID cards, was cracked using data ‘skimmed’ from a distance of around 10 metres.

Phil Booth, NO2ID’s National Coordinator said: “Identity fraud will be made much worse by ID cards, not better. Numbering and indexing every person in the country on a huge central Register, then making us use cards designed to broadcast not only this number but our personal data, including our biometrics, will be an absolute bonanza for identity thieves and fraudsters.”

Jerry Fishenden, Microsoft’s National Technology Officer said: “We should not be building systems that allow hackers to mine information so easily. Inappropriate technology design could provide new hi-tech ways of perpetrating massive identity fraud on a scale beyond anything we have seen before.”

Home Secretary Charles Clarke hailed the bill as a “sensible and acceptable compromise”. But Shadow Home Secretary David Davis vowed that if the Tories win the next election his first act as Home Secretary would be “to do away with this Bill”. Lib Dem MP Nick Clegg said the Bill would “erode privacy, curtail freedom and cost an extraordinary amount”. He added: “It is a monstrous expansion of big, big government.”

Top