Support for the National Identity Scheme remains stable, according to a survey of more than 2,000 people carried out for the Home Office by Taylor Nelson Sofres in February.
The research, released on 6 March, 2008, found that 59 percent of those questioned supported the scheme, with 23 percent opposed. A similar survey by Taylor Nelson Sofres in October 2007 found 59 percent in support, with 20 percent against.
However, a survey by ICM on 1,008 people, also carried out in February and using a question mentioning a likely price of £93 for a biometric passport, found 50 percent in opposition and 47 percent in favour. A poll by YouGov for The Daily Telegraph in December found 48 percent of respondents opposed the scheme and 43 percent were in favour.
The Taylor Nelson Sofres research found that the top reason given by opponents of the scheme was "infringement on my personal freedom", followed closely by the beliefs that the scheme will not work, will be too expensive and is unnecessary. Each of these reasons was mentioned by a quarter or more of those disagreeing, with respondents able to choose more than one answer.
The main reason all respondents believed the scheme was being introduced was immigration, mentioned by 33 percent, up from 23 percent in February and 32 percent in October. Other questions found that respondents saw fighting terrorism, crime and identity fraud as the top potential benefits.
The poll also showed widespread misunderstanding of the scheme. Three-quarters of respondents believed that ID cards will have to be carried at all times, with only 17 percent correctly believing that they will not.
Read this
PGP: Encryption alone no cure for data breaches
In the fight against security breaches, PGP CEO Phil Dunkelberger cautions that encryption by itself is not the answer...
But 56 percent thought that ID cards will be provided free of charge, with just 34 percent saying this is not the case, perhaps explaining the difference in results among different polls.
Respondents said they were most comfortable with using parts of the public sector to have their fingerprints scanned, conflicting with plans to enhance the private sector's role. The most popular location given was post offices (37 percent), followed by local council offices (34 percent) and passport offices (33 percent). Banks, the top private-sector location, were mentioned by 24 percent.
Talkback
I wonder how and where the survey was carried out and how all the questions were phrased.
I personally do not know anyone, who is actually informed about ID cards and the underlying databases etc., who is in favour of the current proposals or the justifications offered.
Of course we will get both in the end, whatever we the public think, by stealth and/or manipulation.
It is a pity that all this, and other life changing decisions made on our behalf by our institutions of government, is founded on dishonesty and incompetence which insult our intelligence.
This is propaganda for sure, no one I know supports the UK version or US version of the ID cards.
The problem is though that the government are clever, they are bringing in the cards slowly, by introducing the cards with limited conditions, and will add to the conditions once they have convinced everyone to have one.
The version they are advertising right now is just the beginning of what data will be put on the cards later on.
Everyone must reject the cards now, so that our civil liberties won't be violated later on.
If you accept primary condition of these cards, you are subscribing to any other conditions the government may impose later on.
Once you accept the cards in 2008, you won't be able to say in years to come when the government decide to say add more data about you to the cards that you don't want them.
Trust me, the long term plans for these cards is to store EVERYTHING about your life on them, although they would never admit this in 2008, as they want to break the news to you gently over a prolonged period to get everyone acclimatized to the idea.
The government want ID cards in everyones wallets before they break the worst of the news to you.
Tis a shame the media are scared of the government after the 45 minute fiasco.
The UK Government know they are lying; We know they are lying; They know that we know that they are lying. But no one can report objectively as the (NUlabour) politicians have made themselves a protected class above the rest of us.
I find it curious that public opinion hasn’t shifted even a single percentage point between October 2007 and March 2008 given the number of security scandals the government has endured in that time frame.
Further more, the government keeps changing its mind about what the I.D. will look like, who’ll have access to it, etc.. who’s supporting this scheme if they don’t even know what it is?
Did they survey the exact same people? In which case that survey would be flawed.
... is getting closer to reality every day. Step by step the government slices off a thin slice of the salami, getting closer to their goal each time - total monitoring of the public.
One of the really sad things is most people actually don't realise just how invasive this is on their privacy. Sure there's no one there watching you what you do in your living room, but with this kind of electronic tracking, it's just as good, if not better. The attitude of so many people saying "I have nothing to hide, why should they be interested in me" shows how little they really understand. If someone is being followed by someone else, they scream, but if they are being electronically followed, they don't care. Where's the difference???
It's time to stop this stupidity from the government. This whole electronic tracking gives so little in positive results, results that could otherwise be achieved with a sufficiently maned police force. I have no right to track Gordon Brown, why should he have the right to track me?