Report - Guardian

230 The LSE Identity Project Report: June 2005The cost of these links was estimated at £41 million; 580 factors such as sophistication,technical standards and whether systems are centralised or distributed may affect thisfigure.InterviewsShould an applicant fail one or more of the checks, this would not necessarily result intheir being refused an identity card. Applications could be grouped into lower andhigher risk categories, with the latter category requiring additional checks. 581 The UKPassport Service is planning the use of interviews for first-time applicants, in order toverify the identity and confirm the likeness of the applicant. 582 The UKPS expects someor all of first time applicants to have to attend UKPS offices or those provided by thirdparties, i.e. some form of high street infrastructure, to prove identity and providebiometrics. 583 The cost of such an infrastructure will be substantial including theacquisition/maintenance of property and increased staff costs.Collecting Biometric InformationDuring the processing of an application, the biometric information provided by therespective applicant would be checked against a central database. The system wouldindicate whether there was a ‘likely’ match with one or more records already in thedatabase. 584 No system based on biometric information is 100% accurate and matchesare declared on the grounds of statistical probability rather than an absolute test.Since the system is likely to produce false positives, additional procedures will berequired. In such circumstances, comparisons would be made between the applicantand the declared match. 585 Government documents do not reveal the predictedfrequency with which ‘matches’ could occur, which would impact upon any costanalysis. There will be a significant administrative burden in dealing with thesesituations.The Government argues that applicants already have ‘to go somewhere’ to have theirphoto taken for their passports or for their driving licence. This is used tocounterbalance any arguments about the inconvenience and costs of the new scheme forprospective applicants. It further states in its consultation document of 2002, that: “thenumber of biometric recorders would be far fewer than the number of photographbooths and an operator would be required to ensure that the information was recordedcorrectly”’. The document also proposes a scheme whereby an applicant could recordtheir biometric information at any time convenient to them. An example provided is onprovision of biometric information: the individual could be given a reference number tolink to that biometric information and presumably apply for the card at a later date.However, this may increase the number of fraudulent applications, and a casual visitorcould be paid to provide their biometrics. The document asserts that any card produced580 Consultation Document, Section 5, 2002, paragraph 12.581 Consultation Document, Section 4, 2002, paragraph 23.582 UKPS Corporate and Business Plans 2004 –2009, page 18583 UKPS Corporate and Business Plans 2004 –2009, page 22584 Consultation Document, Section 4, 2002, paragraph 31.585 Consultation Document, Section 4, 2002, paragraph 32.