Report - Guardian

The LSE Identity Project Report: June 2005 24117Cost ProjectionsAs we have identified throughout this report, the government’s scheme does not providea stable cost environment. Experimental technology, a high security threat and uncertainpublic trust are factors that will create a high degree of uncertainty in any projectedcosting. We are therefore unable to provide any more than a spectrum of possible costs.Within this range, however, we are confident that most cost elements are addressed.We accept the basis of the population projections contained in the indicative costassumptions published in the “Entitlement Card and Identity Fraud” consultation paper,2002.At the end of the rollout period, 67.5 million people would be covered, comprising theresident population aged 16 and over, plus the number of sixteen year olds entering thescheme in the four years after the rollout along with the number of non-casual visitors tothe UK from overseas. It is, however, unclear whether “non casual” visitors includesBritish nationals who are resident overseas.We have assumed that the card envisioned for this system is a “sophisticated” smartcard, and that – as foreshadowed in the original cost estimates –it will be re-issued twiceduring a ten-year periodAs noted above, at this stage in the development of the government’s proposals it ispossible to suggest only a range of probable costs. To date the Government has beenreluctant to discuss cost elements of this scheme in any detail. This is due in part to itsclaim that the matter of cost is commercial in confidence, and due in part to the enablingnature of the legislation. The ongoing dispute over costs is due in large part to the factthat the Government is either not certain exactly what the ID infrastructure will entail,or is unwilling to disclose these details.The Government has not undertaken any detailed cost assessment of their identity cardscheme. In response to an inquiry from Privacy International concerning HM Treasuryanalyses of the costs of creating and maintaining the system, the Treasury responded: