It would be easy to be cynical and suggest the government engaged in a bit of
press control with the timing of the publication of Sir James Crosby’s report on
UK identity management last week.
On the afternoon that home secretary Jacqui Smith announced the latest
changes to ID cards, the Treasury-commissioned Crosby study was also quietly
released after months of delays – Computing was leaked details of its
contents as long ago as last August – see
www.computing.co.uk/2197249.
Advertisement
Smith said she was “indebted” to Crosby, but ignored most of his
recommendations – not least the widely publicised suggestion that ID cards
should be free.
But a detailed look at the Crosby report – which was initiated by Gordon
Brown when he was chancellor – reveals a more coherent, workable, and less
costly alternative to the increasingly ham-fisted and ever-changing plans for ID
cards.
The former HBOS chief executive recommends a system delivered by the private
sector through trusted institutions such as banks. The government has co-opted
at least part of this, in that companies will be asked to bid to provide
biometric enrolment services, but the national identity register remains a
Whitehall resource.
Under Crosby, you choose which trusted organisation looks after your
biometrics. Far less Big Brother.
His proposal is for a consumer-led process that offers citizens who are
increasingly worried about identity theft a secure way to prove who they are,
with a commercial incentive for the banks. And of course, public services can
piggyback the scheme. Compared to the government’s attempts, it appears to make
much more sense.
There is no doubt that in future we will need some form of standardised
electronic personal identity management system to safeguard our details and our
online – and physical – transactions.
But the government’s lacklustre attempts to sell ID cards to a sceptical
public are doing more to threaten this goal than to promote it. The expertise of
the private sector needs to be given more weight in the identity management
debate.
Comments
Have your say on this article