ID card consultancy hits £50m

Frustration builds as technology procurement still has not begun

The government says 70 per cent of ID card costs will be spent anyway on biometric passports

The government has spent £53m on consultants for the national biometric identity card scheme, and continues to use 83 external contractors at a cost of nearly £50,000 per day.

The figures are more than double the value of the original £19m pre-procurement consultancy contract signed in 2004, according to data released to Computing by the Home Office under the Freedom of Information Act.

The ID scheme has been substantially re-shaped in the past 18 months – changing from a standalone card system using entirely new IT systems to a broader identity management programme that will reuse existing government databases and is closely allied with international requirements for biometric passports.

The Identity and Passport Service (IPS) says that since the combined agency was created in April 2006 all spending on consultants covers both the ID and passports programmes.

But continued delays to the start of the ID scheme procurement are starting to raise questions. Originally expected in October 2005, the tendering was rescheduled for May this year, then June, then July.

Some of the delays have been political – caused by the progress of the ID Cards Bill through Parliament, the General Election, and the change in prime minister. But frustrated insiders say there are still unresolved issues, despite the extra time and the army of consultants.

‘The procurement is now not expected until August because the IPS does not have its ducks in a row,’ said a source close to the programme.

‘Some of the consultancy costs can be justified by the fact that the scheme has significantly changed, but £50m is a lot of money and deadline after deadline keeps going by.’

Big IT suppliers, poised for the bidding to start, are also increasingly discontented.

‘The current position is unsustainable,’ said one industry source. ‘The market needs to know if the scheme is going ahead, not least in the context of the government continuing to spend so heavily on consultants.’

Whitehall’s reliance on external skills has attracted a bad reputation. Last month the influential Public Accounts Committee accused the government of ‘sheer profligacy’ in spending £2.8bn a year on consultancy, more than half of that figure going on IT.