This may not be easy: the Government's bill last went through
the House of Commons with a majority of just 31 after 20 Labour MPs
rebelled – and a new report from the London School of Economics
(LSE) is adding fuel to heated arguments over the cost. One of the
authors suggested that "guesswork and wishful thinking" by the Home
Office make a mockery of the entire scheme.
The Home Office has published estimates: it says the scheme will
cost £6 billion over 10 years and that each card, with integrated
biometrics and passport details, will cost £93. But these figures
have been denounced for focusing on the Home Office's costs in
isolation and ignoring the costs that will be incurred by other
bodies that use the ID card scheme, such as the NHS and local
authorities.
The LSE estimated last June that the total cost of the scheme is
more likely to be between £10.6 billion and £19.2 billion with
individual cards costing 230.
The House of Lords last night called for a detailed report
setting out a cost estimate over a 10 year period for all
Government departments, not just the Home Office, and for anyone
else carrying out functions under the legislation. In addition, it
demanded that the cost estimate be examined by the Comptroller and
Auditor General who must prepare a report for Parliament.
Peers also voted last night for amendments to the ID card
legislation that would require more security provisions and more
controls on who can access the data that will be held in a central
register.
In a report published on Sunday, the LSE said that the Home
Office had shown itself incapable of planning the ID scheme, that
the Government "remains on the wrong path" and that control should
pass to the Treasury.
The Report states: "The security of the scheme remains unstable,
as are the technical arrangements for the proposal. The performance
of biometric technology is increasingly questionable. We continue
to contest the legality of the scheme. The financial arrangements
for the proposals are almost entirely secret, raising important
questions of constitutional significance."
The Report identifies 24 unanswered questions that LSE has put
to the Home Office.
"We don't know what to believe any more," said Professor Ian
Angell, head of LSE's Department of Information Systems.
"Contradictions, guesswork and wishful thinking on the part of the
Home Office make a mockery of any pretence that this scheme is
based on serious reasoning."
The Lords are due to resume discussion of the bill on
Monday.
