Report - Guardian

36 The LSE Identity Project Report: June 2005people would not have to provide the same information timeafter time to different service providers;- links between the central register and information held onother systems by service providers so they could makeefficient use of the information stored on the central register.The links would need to be designed so that information aboutspecific entitlements (for example medical restrictions on aperson’s ability to drive) were not made available to otherservice providers without consent;- the issuing of plastic cards to everyone on the central register.The cards may incorporate some information and features on amicrochip embedded into the card. These are commonlyknown as ‘smartcards’. The cards could provide a convenientway for people to prove their identity and their entitlement toservices in some circumstances. In other circumstances such aswhen services are provided over the telephone, the cardholder’sentry on the database would be the main way to proveidentity and entitlement.”This is the exact same architecture in the bill today, despite three consultation processes.For a more comprehensive analysis comparing the final bill introduced into Parliamentin May 2005 and the first consultation document, see Table 2.First consultation (2002-3)In this first consultation, the cards were referred to as “entitlement cards” and the focuswas on preventing identity theft, illegal working, and benefit fraud. 47 From thebeginning, the government made it clear that it favoured something very like the systemproposed in the final bill: database, smartcard with biometric identifiers, crossnotification,cross-linking.The consultation document asked respondents to say how an entitlement/ID card couldhelp them. For example, granted that retailers selling restricted goods such as cigarettesand alcohol must verify the buyer's age, an honest question would be to ask what formof document would be the most help in establishing this. Instead, the question was morefrequently framed as “Would an ID card help?” The answer is clearly likely to be ‘yes’.The ID card was not presented as one of several alternative possible solutions amongwhich respondents might pick. The report notes that “most of Proof of Age stakeholderscommented solely on point 14 of the consultation document”. That is, they commentedsolely on the small portion of the proposals that applied to them. 48Similarly, organisations such as the Law Society and the Transport and GeneralWorkers Union pointed out in this and subsequent consultations that measures are in47 Past ID card proposals have focused on preventing football hooliganism (1988), truancy, drugs, and underagedrinking (1990), and crime in general (1994).48 Consultation summary report, page 123.