Report - Guardian

The LSE Identity Project Report: June 2005 2877. However, many elements of the design of anidentity card scheme, from the national register, tothe design of the card and to its operational use,depend greatly on the precise purpose for which it isdesigned. Although some core functions areconsistent and clear, the changing aims of thescheme do not give total confidence that theGovernment has arrived at a complete set of clearand settled aims for the card. The Government hasnot yet clarified how it intends to deal with someelements of the original proposals for entitlementcards, such as which services should be linked to thecard and whether there should be unique personalnumbers across public services. We consider theseissues further below, but it is clear that they arecentral to the functioning of the scheme. (Paragraph71)8. The draft Bill might have been expected toclarify the Government's aims but we do not believeit has done so. It is essential that the Governmentexplain its intentions on issues raised in this reportbefore the Bill is published. (Paragraph 72)Illegal working and immigration abuse9. Identity cards could make it easier for thoseseeking work to demonstrate their right to do so,and, by the same token, make it easier for the policeto show that a company employing illegal labourhad done so knowingly. (Paragraph 79)10. We believe that identity cards can make asignificant contribution to tackling illegal working.However this will need to be as part of widerenforcement measures, including action againstculpable employers. We repeat ourrecommendations that the Government should targetemployers who deliberately break the law and thatthe Proceeds of Crime Act should also be used toseize profits made from the employment of illegallabour. We welcome the steps the Government hastaken so far, but to be fully effective there must beproperly resourced enforcement of existingregulations. (Paragraph 80)11. The Government must clarify what action willbe expected from the employer, including whetherpresentation of the card by a job applicant is enoughor whether an employer would have to check thebiometrics or the authenticity of the card. If so, theGovernment needs to be clear how often this will berequired and what access to biometric readers or theNational Identity Register will be available toemployers or other agencies. (Paragraph 81)12. We are concerned that the three-month periodfor EU nationals, or those claiming to be such,might constitute a significant loophole: it is difficultto see what would stop someone moving from job tojob on false papers. The Government must bringforward proposals to deal with this loophole, as wellas making a substantial commitment to robustenforcement of laws against illegal working.(Paragraph 82)Supported by research.Supported by research.Not supported by research. Many individuals,because of a variety of personal or technicalcircumstances, may be denied the right to work.Conditionally supported. While a successfuloutcome will depend on a package of measures,risk assessment has not been undertaken to assesswhether illegal working could becomeentrenched, more invisible or more extensive.Supported by research.Supported by research. At its most extreme pointthis situation has the potential to substantiallyundermine key benefits that could flow from thescheme and has an even greater potential toundermine public trust in the system.