Speaking in Parliament on Wednesday, home secretary David Blunkett claimed that most of the public back the government's plan to bring in a national biometric identification card, and rubbished suggestions that the scheme was a threat to privacy.
"Let me make it clear: no one has anything to fear from being correctly identified, but everything to fear from having their identity stolen or misused. Focus groups and polling evidence demonstrate that there is around 80 percent support for identity cards," claimed Blunkett. "As the cost of secure identification will be necessary with or without ID cards, I believe that the proposals that I am setting out will win widespread support," the home secretary added.
While some polls have found evidence that the majority of people might welcome ID cards, the government has already admitted that there is significant opposition to their introduction from tech-aware members of society.
A consultation on the issue ended in January 2003, and after months of procrastinating the Home Office eventually revealed that nearly 5,000 people had registered their opposition to the introduction of ID cards -- or entitlement cards, as those in authority called them at the time.
This volume of negative responses was more then enough to tip the balance of the consultation against ID cards. The government then controversially took the decision to treat these opposing views as a mere petition, on the grounds that organisations such as Stand.org and Privacy International had created Web pages that encouraged people to consider the issue and take part in the consultation.
Under the government's proposal, people renewing passports from 2007 will be issued with an ID card and will have to pay £77 at current prices -- compared to £42 today. A combined identity card and driving licence will also be available at a cost of £73 instead of the £38 charged now for driving licences alone.
Once ID cards have reached 80 percent penetration, the government says it will then decide if people will have to produce them in order to use public services.
Despite this softly-softly approach, civil rights advocates have been angered by the plans. Privacy International claims that Blunkett's scheme is unnecessary and "mathematically and technologically" impossible to achieve, and that the related security threats have been vastly understated.
Talkback
the government won't listen to the public. obviousness? they'll keep charging the public for services we primarily pay for in the first place. nothing will stop the government. only the realisation of their own blatant faliure.
ID cards will not solve anything, only create problems and cost us more money to buy, and make, and implement. the policing costs will double due to checking the cards, more people will be arrested for not having cards. more money.
pretty lame.
Question : When has any government paid any attention to public opinion.
Answer : Only in verbiage handed out directly prior to an election.
As soon as the election is over every government in my memory(I'm 38) has totally ignored public opinion.
We've recently been polled about genetically engineered crops. We resoundingly said no. It will be interesting to see how the government responds to our decision. My guess is they will either be legalised or poorly restricted in a manor which allows big business to circumvent it.
Most western democracies are farcical. All we have is the chance to vote for our dictator every 4/5 years. Even then this choice is effectively limited by bipartisan politics to a choice of two.
I already have a British Identity Card it was issued in 1944 (the year of my birth) - presumably a war time measure, but I've still got the card.Most of my working life I carried an identity card, with my photo and signature, from 20 to 42 years of age - only those who have something to hide or are paranoid fear carrying a card -and it would cut out a lot of benefits and imigration abuse.
This is one of the annoying features of Tony Blair.HE NEVER LISTENS TO PEOPLE...on any issue.It was the same thing with the Iraq war.But Blunkett will soon see just how out of touch with public opinion he was on this issue.It will be unworkable because millions of people will not cooperate.The whole concept of having to fork out 40£ for a piece of unncessary plastic to establish ones identity when other obvious methods exist is laughable and absurd,even apart from the civil liberties argument.