UK Parliament / Open data

Identity Cards Bill

It is clear that the biometric identifiers that will be used, as I said at Second Reading, are the face, two eyes and 10 fingers. I almost feel as though I am talking about a child’s game—““hands, knees and face””. That biometric data will be available and could be checked against other data that the police may obtain to verify the identity of an individual. If, for example, the noble Lord were to pretend to be me, and if he gave my name but had his facial characteristics and size, they would be able to check that he did not have the terrible burden of being me, but was in fact his delightful own self. Those details can be checked for verification, but that is what one will be able to do—checking and verifying. The noble Baroness rightly says that this is a probing amendment. She does not wish me to look too closely at the way in which the amendment is phrased and I do not propose to make any proper or improper criticisms of it. I take it on the basis on which she has put it forward. It seeks to establish an annual review process for the Secretary of State on the costs and technical capacity of the identity cards scheme. I am afraid I do not accept that this is the best or most proportionate way to provide assurance about the development and delivery of the identity cards scheme. First, even 12 months after the Bill is passed the scheme would not be in operation and it is difficult to see how such a report could be laid before Parliament without going into detail about how the costs and technical aspects of the scheme are being developed and considered. That could affect the Government’s ability to get best value from the procurement process if early reports gave too much information prematurely. Secondly, there are already safeguards in place to ensure that the scheme develops in a cost-effective way and that the technology is robust enough to deliver the scheme. The programme is already subject to regular OGC Gateway Reviews. The OGC Gateway process is being improved to reduce the risk of failure by identifying omissions, making recommendations, and viewing the whole life cycle, thus ensuring the project is on track to deliver. In addition, within the Home Office there is a new centre of excellence in programme and project management. We have also—

About this proceeding contribution

Reference

675 c981-2 

Session

2005-06

Chamber / Committee

House of Lords chamber
Back to top