Report - Guardian

The LSE Identity Project Report: June 2005 24718Design Principles and OptionsThe controversy, challenges and threats arising from the Government’s identityproposals are largely due to the technological design itself. While many of thetechnological details remain undetermined and are to be established at a later date insecondary legislation, some of the larger decisions regarding the architecture of thescheme are already decided, and are encoded within the bill.There are many ways to design even the simplest technologies that will cause asignificant difference in outcome for society. Whether it was the intention of thedesigner, early applications and market opportunities, the social norms at the time, or amyriad of other factors, small decisions have transformed the way our society works.This is the transformative potential of technology as both an enabler and as part of theinfrastructure of society.With Government projects as important as a national identity system, technologicalchoices are crucial. Relatively simple choices, such as which department or ministry isresponsible for the design of a government infrastructure, may radically shape futurepolicy decisions, and may even determine entire courses of action. For example, thechoice of which arm of the military would be responsible for the U.S. nuclearinfrastructure dictated much of the Cold War policy because of the use of Air Forcemissile silos rather than Army installations that were mobile. Similarly, when aministry of energy is responsible for research into nuclear power, the power generatorsthat result differ significantly from those designed by a defence ministry.When the Home Office is the proponent and selector of an infrastructure as vast as anidentity system, the choices made in the basic design of the system will reflect theinterests and expertise of the Home Office. This is particularly important in the designof an ID card, given that its design goals include not only combating crime, but alsoenabling e-government, enhancing trust in commerce, and providing the ‘gold standard’for identity in Britain. The Home Office’s design choices are in stark contrast to thesystem being developed in France, emerging from the Ministry for the Civil Service,State Reform and Spatial Planning. The ID Card Bill for the UK proposes a massivecomplex centralised system with an audit trail that focuses on identification, while theFrench system proposes a simpler decentralised and user-oriented system that focuseson confidence-building.Other sections of this report address issues raised by the international environment andpublic opinion. This section identifies the core differences between the schemeproposed here with those in other countries. It looks to public opinion as a guiding