Identity card cost ‘may be cut’
Ollie Stone-Lee reports for the BBC web site from the Labour conference in Manchester:
The costs of the identity cards scheme could be cut “quite substantially” by making more use of existing government databases, a minister has said.
Home Office Minister Liam Byrne told a Labour conference fringe meeting he had undertaken a full-scale review of the controversial scheme in recent months.
Roger Smith, director of human rights group Justice, told the same meeting about the political and practical dangers of the scheme:
He warned that less affluent voters in particular would oppose the scheme if they were forced to pay for the cards.
“I fear that the government is walking into a bear trap. This was a grandiose project like the NHS computer and like the NHS computer is going to fail,” Mr Smith told the meeting.
Others forcefully expressed their opposition:
One councillor from Salford told Mr Byrne he was prepared to go to jail for his opposition to the project.
Labour was not always going to be in power, said the councillor, adding: “I just don’t trust government.”
September 26th, 2006 at 12:13
I,ve just read the article on the BBC website,and its the usual lies,half truths and blatant bulls**t as usual.Don,t believe a word this man or this government says.
September 26th, 2006 at 17:27
The Register’s letters page has some interesting correspondence on this story:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/09/26/letters_2609/
September 27th, 2006 at 21:11
If they don’t know how much it will really cost (and we all know they don’t) – how will they ‘cut the cost’ I wonder?
No doubt the answer will involve finding new ways to empty people’s wallets.
September 27th, 2006 at 23:09
It’s crystal clear Liam has never been anywhere *near* a data cleansing project (or even a real, large scale database, with real data for real people).
September 28th, 2006 at 12:26
I was rather under the impression that the purpose of the National Identity Scheme was to attach more firmly (ie better identify) individual human beings, through biometrics, with their names and other details.
One of the largest costs in doing this is the attendance at registration centres to give biometrics.
Remaining costs for registration (a fraction of that for biometric registration) relate to the amount of information to be recorded against each registered person. Surely the more information to be recorded, the higher that part of the cost: to record the data and check its accuracy.
How then, can use of more data (but excluding biometrics except for those with neo-criminal records) from existing government databases (of well-known indifferent accuracy) do anything but increase costs?
Best regards
September 28th, 2006 at 22:21
Some commenters here seem to be under the impression the governemtn is attempting to tell the truth r even to construct a sensible scheme. Oh really! We’ve had them in power long enough to know that they are strangers to the truth.
September 29th, 2006 at 16:15
The day that Blair and company start telling the truth,is the day that I start supporting Tottenham Hotspur.(No ofence to any spurs supporter is intended).
But having seen Blair on stage at the party conference this week I doubt if anything will change at all,he,ll still be telling lies on his deathbed.As for the shysters who are preparing to take his place,just examine their voting records on i.d cards,they are all in it together.