We say that our figures are sound. They are sound because they are based on actual costs. We have predicated them on the costs that we have now. We know how much it costs us to run the Passport Agency. We know the costs of the system that we intend to establish. Given the bracket of the £397 million—being how much we currently spend—we have extrapolated how much it would cost to add the extra 30 per cent. As I have said quite clearly, 70 per cent of this money is going to have to be spent already. I am happy to put in the Library a detailed exposition of the difference between our costings and the others. I referred to the letter written by Professor Angel of the LSE. We have now replied. There seems to be a basic error. We were surprised to discover, for example, that in the body of the report undertaken by the LSE there was no reference to one of the major reports on biometrics and the way in which that was dealt with in the United States. It is unusual for such a gap not to have been addressed. That is surprising, but the correspondence may elucidate some of the differences between us.
Identity Cards Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Scotland of Asthal
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 19 December 2005.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Identity Cards Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
676 c1564 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 19:29:18 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_288263
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_288263
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_288263