UK

Rain (AM and PM) 9° London Hi 10°C / Lo 4°C

Last rites for ID cards read by Johnson

Britons will no longer be required to register for identity cards, says Home Secretary

By Nigel Morris, Deputy Political Editor

Alan Johnson has ditched the ID cards scheme

Reuters

Alan Johnson has ditched the ID cards scheme

The Home Secretary Alan Johnson killed off the Government's cherished compulsory identity cards scheme last night, promising that British citizens would never be forced to sign up for them. Critics urged the Government to retreat further and scrap its flagship £5bn policy outright.

Mr Johnson's predecessors had argued that the cards were needed to help tackle terrorism, illegal immigration and serious crime. They suggested that the move to compulsory carrying would follow once more than 80 per cent of the population was covered.

But, in his first major announcement as Home Secretary, Mr Johnson pledged that ID cards would remain entirely voluntary for UK nationals in future, and insisted that it should be a "personal choice" for citizens to sign up. He also abandoned plans to require some pilots and airport workers to carry ID cards in the face of bitter opposition from their unions.

Mr Johnson acknowledged that the Government had been wrong to present the cards as a "panacea" against terrorism. He stressed their value in helping young people prove their age in bars or in acting as an alternative to passports for travellers in Europe.

The climbdown follows a resurgence of cabinet tensions over the scheme. The Independent disclosed in April that senior ministers were raising fresh questions over the future of the ID card programme as they came under pressure to find savings.

The Government has already started issuing compulsory ID cards to foreign nationals and now intends to offer them on a voluntary basis – at a cost of £30 – to UK nationals in Manchester later this year and elsewhere in the North-west of England in early 2010. Other people will start being added to the register in 2011-12, underpinning the scheme when they apply for biometric passports.

But failure to update names and addresses on the register will carry a fine of up to £1,000 – which critics complain will amount to compulsion by the back door.

The Conservatives have already announced their intention to bin the project if they win the next general election. Mr Johnson said yesterday that the taxpayer would save "diddly squat" if the ID cards scheme was axed, as its estimated £5bn cost would come from fees paid by people when they renewed their passports.

He said that he remained a supporter of the concept of ID cards and even wanted to accelerate their introduction. But he repeatedly stressed he wanted them to remain voluntary, making clear that any move to compulsion was off the agenda for good.

"Holding an identity card should be a personal choice for British citizens – just as it is now to obtain a passport," he said. Asked if they would ever be made mandatory, Mr Johnson replied: "No."

David Blunkett, who championed ID cards when he was Home Secretary, originally suggested that they could become compulsory in 2013. The target date was later moved back to about 2018 as practical problems over the scheme mounted.

Plans to run a trial of compulsory ID cards for airside staff at London City and Manchester airports have now been ditched amid threats of industrial action from pilots.

The opposition parties argue that billions of pounds could be saved by abandoning ID cards.

Chris Huhne, the Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman, said: "This is another nail in the coffin for the Government's illiberal ID cards policy, which will soon be so voluntary that only Home Office mandarins seeking promotion will have them."

David Davis, the former shadow home secretary, said that the retreat marked the "death knell of this ill-conceived scheme".

He said: "One of the fundamental design flaws in the system was that it had to be compulsory for it to work as advertised. Otherwise, how could any public servant, be they police, immigration officer, or welfare provider, demand to see it?"

But civil liberties groups warned that ministers were still plotting covert compulsion as anyone who wanted to leave the UK would be added to the ID register when they renewed their passport.

Phil Booth, national co-ordinator of NOID, said Mr Johnson's claim that the scheme would be voluntary was the "same hollow evasion it has always been". "Once you sign up, you will be tagged for life," he said. "And it is only voluntary in the sense that you can 'choose' never to have a passport and volunteer not ever to travel."

Isabella Sankey, director of policy for Liberty said: "The Home Secretary needs to be clear as to whether entry on to the National Identity Register will continue to be automatic when applying for a passport. If so, the identity scheme will be compulsory in practice.

"However you spin it, big ears, four legs and a long trunk still make an elephant. And this white elephant would be as costly to privacy and race equality as to our purses."

Retreat on the cards? Home Office policy

David Blunkett, Home Secretary "It will be compulsory... we will have to investigate the ins and outs of achieving that." (September 2001)

Charles Clarke, Home Secretary "This would be a universal scheme for everyone legally resident in the UK." (March 2006)

John Reid, Home Secretary "I favour tighter immigration controls and ID cards." (September 2006)

Jacqui Smith, Home Secretary "As more people participate and register I want to see the scheme become universal." (March 2008)

Alan Johnson, Home Secretary "Holding an identity card should be a personal choice for British citizens." (Yesterday)

Post a Comment

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.

Comments

last rites for johnson's credibility
[info]merle2006 wrote:
Tuesday, 30 June 2009 at 11:50 pm (UTC)
this could and should scupper johnson's ambition to lead labour. why pursue a costly id card system if they're not compulsory? my suspicion is that they will try to make it compulsory sneakily, by the backdoor, by slowly making it a proposition that people can't do without whether they like it or not - for example by linking it to passports. mr johnson comes out of it, so far, looking pathetic. it's hard to believe that ordinary labour supporters - or voters generally - want id cards. they should just kill the idea clearly and completely.
Re: last rites for johnson's credibility
[info]49niner wrote:
Wednesday, 1 July 2009 at 05:14 am (UTC)
Johnson has been given the task of burying the scheme bit by bit, hoping no one will notice. I'm increasingly confident that after the election it will be quietly buried somewhere in the dusty archives of Whitehall.

Good riddance!
Compulsory for 80% of us
[info]swiftlady13 wrote:
Wednesday, 1 July 2009 at 12:20 am (UTC)
There is absolutely NOTHING new about this announcement. Big non-news

The so-called ID "cards" - actually powerful computer chips, have always, all along, been promised as "voluntary."
But at the same time they are built into passports starting next year, and driving licences.

So yes, as long as you don't want or need a passport; as long as you don't want or need a driving licence; you have a "choice" on whether you use the so-called ID "cards."

That's maybe 20% of people, maximum.
That's really REALLY voluntary.
Last Rites?
[info]thisanthat wrote:
Wednesday, 1 July 2009 at 03:55 am (UTC)
Yeah! And like every other piece of NuLabour legislation it will be reincarnated through the back door!!!!
[info]john_levett wrote:
Wednesday, 1 July 2009 at 06:45 am (UTC)
It is the National Identity Register (NIR) to which I object on the bases of its intrusion and its vulnerability to data loss/theft. If the ID card is genuinely to be scrapped, then the NIR needs to follow as there is no justification for applying it solely to drivers and passport holders.

At the moment, Johnson is merely following the Blunkett line of re-packaging the ID card as an integral part of a passport or drivers license. There is no fundamental change in this announcement: British freedom and civil liberties remain as compromised as ever.
Reasons for ID Cards.
[info]random1y wrote:
Wednesday, 1 July 2009 at 06:55 am (UTC)
Reasons to have ID cards:

1.
Would a politician hold a press conference before a masked anonymous audience?

2.
If you've been added to a list, wouldn't you like to know who by, and who is reading that list?
3.
The state knows precisely who you are. Why shouldn't you know who everyone else is including those state representatives?

4.
If your children are in an Internet chat room, wouldn't you like to know who with?

With DNA finger printing we are all already walking ID cards... Do you want to live in a society that acknowledges that fact?

5.
With anonymity it is almost impossible to discern a persons real motives in a debate..................

6.
In time digital identity and mandatory digital signatures will bring to society a renewed trust in the communiqué we exchange, information will be regarded as false unless accompanied by the identity of the author. Encouraging accountability. If it were simply priests hiding in walls, I wouldn't be concerned.

7.
Identity cards: you are one, a DNA or biometric fingerprint. It is going to work against you if you know about it or not. Wouldn't you like to enjoy the advantages of authentic identification?

8.
'n' hundred comments. How many by one extremist using multiple pseudonymns?

9.
IS THIS TEXT WORTH READING!?

10.
The information revolution that has made a sieve of the offices of banks, educational facilities and government. Using a writeable CD, a USB data key, a mobile phone, a web browser or even a floppy disk it is possible to transport data out of a building. Can there be any hope of digital security without identifying the individual?

11.
Accountability: why is it when you provide someone with a mask they simply do not act responsibly? Anonymity has its uses, particularly when we are discussing current limits of freedom itself. Otherwise let us keep masks for Venetian party events and not political debate.

My blog entry on digital identity cards.
Re: Reasons for ID Cards.
[info]billdavy1949 wrote:
Wednesday, 1 July 2009 at 08:11 am (UTC)
Q9: A: - no
Re: Reasons for ID Cards.
[info]nightside242 wrote:
Wednesday, 1 July 2009 at 10:20 am (UTC)
In reply to point 6, are you now suggesting that someone's political and ethic beliefs be added to the card? That is the stupid pro-ID argument I've ever heard.
Re: Reasons for ID Cards.
[info]random1y wrote:
Wednesday, 1 July 2009 at 12:20 pm (UTC)
A culture of authenticated identification would cause people to consider what they say about others more carefully. In time, who would trust a list of names unless the identity of the person adding to a list were known? Surely a necessity given the rate at which we now move information around? I expound upon this a bit further in my blog entry:

"What of the individual's freedoms? The dual between the monolithic political entities of the last century brought with it the legacy of the cold war which lead society to new levels of surveillance and new levels of anonymity, a state which is now being compounded by the arrival of the information age. The news papers inform us that secret black lists are being kept and circulated via email, that secret catalogues of fascists are being leaked. Information about you or me, compiled by the masked and circulated electronically amongst the anonymous. If you've been added to a list, wouldn't you like to know who by? Or who has read that list?

What of photographs taken covertly and circulated anonymously with no signature of ownership? Media circulated via the Internet could be prevented by the Internet's search engines unless signed with an individual's digital identity, whilst also enforcing artist acknowledgment; this is a solution many would welcome.

In time digital identity and mandatory digital signatures could bring to society a renewed trust in the communiqué we exchange, information will be regarded as false unless accompanied by the identity of the author, encouraging accountability."
Re: Reasons for ID Cards.
[info]jezburns wrote:
Wednesday, 1 July 2009 at 11:00 am (UTC)
That is the most brilliant satire of the kind of crass ad-hominem arguments used by supporters of a discredited and sinister policy of population monitoring. You perfectly capture the way proponents of ID / database schemes become so easily cornered by their contradictions yet will blithely stumble into ever more tangled thickets of logical fallacy. I like the way you create this character whose 'arguments' are so pointless and irrelevant that he gives the sneaky impression of having another, unspoken reason for supporting this ludicrous scheme, such as financial interest, or maybe blind loyalty to a political master- that's hilarious- sounds like Ed Balls!

Anyway, great post- keep it up!
Re: Reasons for ID Cards.
[info]random1y wrote:
Wednesday, 1 July 2009 at 12:21 pm (UTC)
Population monitoring, like digital passports? Bank, credit and NI cards? I suppose you think this information should only be available to the state and the violent extremist factions that exist within its military and police forces? If you survive the mercernaries of course.

I do have an alterior motive, I'd like to sleep at night, and course there is more power in politics here:
Shucks! I know afactory that's all tooled up and is going to be very disappointed
[info]cronyblatcher wrote:
Wednesday, 1 July 2009 at 08:00 am (UTC)
Re: Shucks! I know afactory that's all tooled up and is going to be very disappointed
[info]cronyblatcher wrote:
Wednesday, 1 July 2009 at 08:07 am (UTC)
On the other hand, the word on the grapevine is that raceteers will be able to fall on the old ID theft / manufacture method of buying within the DWP. Funny don't y'think, that this item has been 'lost' by google? http://oss.itproportal.com/security/netcrime/article/2006/5/14/dwp-staff-alleged-collusion-with-organised-crime/
Re: Shucks! I know afactory that's all tooled up and is going to be very disappointed
[info]cronyblatcher wrote:
Wednesday, 1 July 2009 at 08:20 am (UTC)
hmmmm?!
[info]pete_bruffell wrote:
Wednesday, 1 July 2009 at 08:20 am (UTC)
call me cynical...but i smell something fishy. i'm sure this will not be the last we hear on this. maybe this is just a repositioning to improve the polls?...knowing that a lot of people will be voting cons because they have explicitly said they will srcap this scheme. watch this space.
What???
[info]berewic wrote:
Wednesday, 1 July 2009 at 08:28 am (UTC)
What part of "electoral wipe-out" does NuLabour not understand?

After the next general election they will be gone, never to return. It matters not one jot what they say now. After 12yrs of back stabbing lies, who's listening?
Re: What???
[info]philgibson wrote:
Wednesday, 1 July 2009 at 01:37 pm (UTC)
I wouldn't say 'never to return'. The conservatives did even more harm back in the day than the Labour party has, and they seem to have recovered well. It's amazing what horrors can be erased from the minds of a nation in little more than a decade.

It's the same way as its always been; the reds screw up and the blues make their way back into power, then the blues screw up and the reds get back into power. Rince and repeat.

Both parties must thank god every night for the gift of the recency effect.


Not a climbdown
[info]rl1j3b wrote:
Wednesday, 1 July 2009 at 08:45 am (UTC)
The scheme has simply been aligned with passports. They get their biometric data from every British passport holder which is enough, for now. It allows facial recognition software and the omnipresent cameras to track and control people. Why spend all that money on individual cards? Within the next 5 years you can expect police to be carrying facial scanners or fingerprint readers linked to the biometric database.
what a waste
[info]leedsrob wrote:
Wednesday, 1 July 2009 at 08:58 am (UTC)
Billions of taxpayers pounds spent so that young people can get a drink in a bar. New Labour are no longer a joke they're an expensive farce. I want my money back!!!!!!!!
Pernicious
[info]arion444 wrote:
Wednesday, 1 July 2009 at 09:06 am (UTC)
If anyone thinks that the Gov is backing down or backing away on this issue, think again. An I.D. tag, whether in the form of a card or an implanted RFID chip under the skin in your forearm is a linchpin in the effort to do away with cash altogether. The mark of the beast is coming, unless you don't want it to.
ID cards - just wait
[info]rooster281 wrote:
Wednesday, 1 July 2009 at 09:17 am (UTC)
They have not abandoned the idea, if they get in again it will come back. Meanwhile the database which underpins it continues.
Sceptic
[info]thorntongate wrote:
Wednesday, 1 July 2009 at 09:22 am (UTC)
I wouldn't read the last rites just yet, guys.

This could be a very clever move to get J Public to adopt ID cards by stealth, using social and commercial pressures to nudge us to 'volunteer' for one.


Smokescreen
[info]bobbellinhell wrote:
Wednesday, 1 July 2009 at 09:27 am (UTC)
As other posters have pointed out, because you can't open a bank account without a driving licence or passport, everyone will effectively be forced to be on the identity register .
ID Cards are needed
[info]uanime5 wrote:
Wednesday, 1 July 2009 at 10:29 am (UTC)
It's a pity the Government gave into a vocal minority. ID cards are an important step in making it easy to prove your identity. I would rather prove who I am with an ID card than a utility bill.
id cards
[info]ouldbob wrote:
Wednesday, 1 July 2009 at 10:36 am (UTC)
Stalin is not yet dead, I see. Apparatchiks will fight to the death to keep their control over us. Petty minded tyrants all of them.
[info]ajwimble wrote:
Wednesday, 1 July 2009 at 10:49 am (UTC)
On the surface this looks like a good thing, but on closer inspection I don't think it means a great deal. In my opinion the biggest problem with the ID card scheme is the Database that was supposed to support it. As someone who needs a passport I still have no choice about being on the database, which means that all this change means is that I will not have to carry a small piece of plastic.
Cards are irrelevant
[info]jezburns wrote:
Wednesday, 1 July 2009 at 11:13 am (UTC)
The cards themselves are completely irrelevant (or at least as irrelevant as the concepts of individual identity and privacy are to our Government). You might as well have an ID shoe, or an ID Swiss Roll, or maybe more accurately, facial-recognition cameras in shops and on street corners or interlinked tracking systems that will follow financial transactions on your credit cards. Basically anything that will tie your location to your identity by communicating with a centralised database containing all your personal and private information will perform exactly the same function as an ID card. Voluntary or compulsory, it doesn't matter. So long as the information is collected, stored in one place, interlinked and made accessible to by thousands of anonymous middle ranking government officials (and eventually private companies where money can be made), we have a scheme that everyone in this country should still be just as worried about. Alan Johnson, I would be willing to bet, has absolutely no plans to change this- his hands will have already been tied.

What is interesting is how much of this 'databasification' has come from European rather than domestic legislative plans - Google Project STORK - not a conspiracy theorist's fantasy but a real EU project for establishing and linking databases on EU citizens, regardless of their desire for privacy, is still in development. A quick read of the material on it shows that the UK is being used as a testing-ground for this scheme. Who in our government benefits and how remains to be seen, but I'm sure some will end up at the EU's top table as a result of their selling out of our liberty.
Last rites for ID cards read by Johnson
[info]famulla wrote:
Wednesday, 1 July 2009 at 12:11 pm (UTC)
HOKAY BUDDY LET HIM READ I KNOWS HIM WELLL HE NO SIGN CHEQUE ONLY PUT THUMB of TOES LET HIM READ HE NO UNDEARSTAND OR NO WRITE HE IS GOOFY Y U WORRY ABOUT HIM> woryy about ID it is I deal U deal V deal all deal he no deal WE are out y all get fumes relaxo relax no probelo at all him bad mother in law no sleep so talks of id bad mand him eh? Put him the sugar cane juicer he come sweet talk good then no id
HOKAY
I thank you
Firozali A Mulla
Corrupt MPs face axe from angry voters sorry this mouse run on the pee and write
Citizens Register
[info]old_green wrote:
Wednesday, 1 July 2009 at 01:07 pm (UTC)
They have already compiled the NIR - it's called the Citizens Register, complied from records for tax, health, social security, electoral register, etc.

This is how India is compiling its population register for issuing national ID cards.

Did you hear about that, last week, India is introducing universal biometric smart ID cards, to be complete by 2011 (just two years time) at a cost of US$ 2 billion
EU and ID cards
[info]old_green wrote:
Wednesday, 1 July 2009 at 01:16 pm (UTC)
The EU has always been linked to ID cards, but Britain was very powerful in promoting the ID agenda in the EU, particularly under the Blair presidency of Europe in 2005.

Statewatch has published documentary accounts of this: -
http://www.statewatch.org/news/2005/jul/09eu-passports-id-cards.htm
EU: Biometrics - from visas to passports to ID cards
On 11 July the UK Presidency of the Council of the European Union (the 25 governments) put forward a proposal that all ID cards in the EU should have biometrics (EU doc no: 11092/05 (http://www.statewatch.org/news/2005/jul/11092-05.pdf).
See: UK Presidency proposes that all ID cards have biometrics - everyone to be fingerprinted
http://www.statewatch.org/news/2005/jul/07eu-id-bio-plan.htm

We can only dread to think what will happen if Blair become first President of the EU under the Lisbon Treaty.

ID cards are just the first part of what the EU calls the 'Digital Tsunami'
The Dynamics are Changing
[info]cardrew wrote:
Wednesday, 1 July 2009 at 03:27 pm (UTC)
Now we have got rid of Jacqui Smith who was hell bent on ID cards, we can eliminate this expensive and intrusive scheme, that was solely initiated to control the people of Great Britain. We had reached the point where they were extremely unpopular, but were being justified because of the enormous amounts already spent on this project.

A lot of the biometric information for passports was forced on Britain by the Bush/Cheney regime who used 9/11 as a marketing tool for the security industry. Fortunately Obama cares about civil liberties and personal responsibility, so we no longer have the same pressures to serve our master.

One of the few benefits of the credit crisis is that countries no longer have funds to enrich the security industry.
Wonderful news!
[info]sickofstupidity wrote:
Wednesday, 1 July 2009 at 04:50 pm (UTC)
Wonderful news! This is a victory for common sense, sanity and civil liberties!

However, I dread to think how much taxpayers' money has already been wasted on this idiotic, unworkable, illiberal piece of government control freakery. We should all get a refund!
[info]ahmetk wrote:
Wednesday, 1 July 2009 at 08:22 pm (UTC)
I am glad they scrapped the ID. It was a stupid police-state idea that would have not helped anyone except a ruthless dictator trying to keep tabs on citizens.
I would like to know the real number of crimes that CCTV's have helped solve in the past 8 years. Though they can help sometimes but i fail to see how can an ID deter terrorists & criminals.

Most popular


Article Archive

Day In a Page

Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat

Select date