We must end data confusion

's Data Debate campaign starts from the belief that the creation of multiple overlapping and potentially contradictory government databases is a recipe for disaster.

There are not only unnecessary costs - although they alone will be significant. In a digital society there is no room for woolly thinking on citizen information.

The Bichard Enquiry into the employment of Soham murderer Ian Huntley in a school is just one example of the potential consequences of any confusion. And with the introduction of ID cards authorising access to services such as healthcare, the questions are not going away.

At least four separate departments are currently pursuing plans for a definitive central register - one for ID cards, one health records, and so on. Barely a week passes without announcement of another database plan. But there is no co-ordination.

Computing approached both the Office of the eEnvoy and the Home Office for comment on the campaign.

The responses were illuminating. By re-directing the enquiry to the Office of National Statistics - because one of the many central register projects belongs to that agency - both departments sharply illustrated the lack of either understanding or ownership at the root of the problem.

Both also questioned the sense of holding all citizen information in one place, which is categorically not being suggested.

Such misunderstandings can only exist because the citizen information debate has simply not been had.

It needs to be, and fast; before millions of pounds are wasted on yet more unreliable databases to swell the already extensive collection, and before more people are inconvenienced or worse.

If there was ever a time for 'joined up government', it is now. Responsibility for Whitehall-wide co-ordination of database projects should be written into the remit of the Head of eGovernment role currently being advertised.

Only then can the UK fully benefit from 21st century technology.