Recent suggestions that the national biometric identity card scheme is hanging in the balance may be misleading.
All the latest signals suggest that, despite the manifest absence of the technology procurement, the government’s commitment to the scheme is stronger than ever.
What is true is that the scheme is broadening almost beyond recognition. But these changes make its eventual implementation if anything more certain – although far, far later than planned.
The first signs of new thinking were suggestions last year that the cards might be used as secure door passes for offices or to streamline private sector hiring procedures. Now the mantra from all quarters is ID management in its broadest sense, rather than the cards themselves.
And Ian Watmore, head of the Prime Minister’s Delivery Unit, even goes so far as to say the scheme will ultimately have more uses in the private sector than the public.
Leaving aside the point that any wider ID management plan will, by necessity, rely on the register underpinning the cards, and the cynical view that there is no better time for refocusing than when money is tight and feet are cold, the reality is that a rethink of the scheme makes it more likely rather than less. As does the ministerial committee on ID management chaired by Jack Straw. As does the appointment of former Home Office ID head Katherine Courtney as director of business development at the new Identity and Passport Service. Not to mention the reaffirmation of the Home Secretary’s commitment in last week’s departmental reform plans.
But most telling is HBOS chief executive Sir James Crosby’s new role leading a public/private forum on ID management. The forum is not the first private sector group to consider the issue – the difference is that Sir James was appointed by the Chancellor.
There have been whispers since the beginning that the plan was resisted by the Treasury on the grounds of expense. That the Chancellor is looking for private sector gains suggests a certainty that the scheme will happen and an inclination to spread the costs as wide as possible.
There is little doubt that the ID scheme, whatever its final shape, will take far longer than originally thought. But that is as it should be. The longer spent thinking about what uses it might have, the better the chances of the taxpayer getting something back for the astronomic investment.
What do you think? Email us at: feedback@computing.co.uk
Related stories
reader comments