33. Memorandum submitted by
the Metropolitan Police Service
FIRST STAGE
1. The Metropolitan Police Service (MPS)
has been asked to comment on the Home Office proposals for a national
identity card scheme. We understand that the scheme will be introduced
in a two stage process which, in summary, is likely to be as follows:
(i) Establish a National Identity Register;
(ii) Proceed towards more secure passports and
driving licences based on biometric technology;
(iii) In parallel to the above, to develop a
plain ID card;
(iv) Introduce mandatory biometric testing for
all foreign nationals coming into the UK for more than three months.
2. With the exception of (iv) above, Stage
One would be voluntary. The database will be developed from scratch
to avoid data errors in the system now. New applicants for driving
licences and passports will automatically go on the register.
Others could volunteer to go on or apply for a plain ID card.
The Home Office believe that 80% of the economically active population
could be on the register within five years of inception.
SECOND STAGE
3. If the conditions were right, this First
Stage phased roll out would then be followed by a move to a compulsory
card scheme in which it would be compulsory to have a card—though
not to carry one—and to produce a card to access public
services in ways defined by those services.[63]
THE MPS RESPONSE
4. The Metropolitan Police Service supports
the creation of a National Identity Card Scheme and is particularly
attracted to the concept of a National Identity Register. We have
seen no evidence either here, or in previous debates, that suggests
the introduction of an identity card will in itself lead to a
reduction in crime or an increase in detection rates. However,
we do believe that a society built around an individual's true
identity and their ability to prove it, will significantly reduce
the opportunity for crime in a number of areas.
5. We note with interest that "the
proposals are designed to protect, not erode, civil liberties"
and we fully support that concept. For that reason we believe
that it is important that we show our support for the scheme but
are not seen to be the lead agency asking for it. We fear that
if the police service is seen to be pushing for the introduction
of identity cards it will put in many peoples mind a direct link
to criminality with which they may not wish to be associated.
Rather than being seen as a liberating tool that supports individuals
it is likely to be regarded with suspicion and seen as a tool
of oppression. The stance that the MPS will adopt is that we will
support the identity card scheme in whatever form it develops
into, but will seek to maximise opportunities for a more efficient
and effective policing service.
6. We are particularly concerned of the
effects the scheme might have on those disadvantaged members of
our communities. Many of these do not own motorcars or travel
abroad and are unlikely to apply for a plain ID card given the
costs involved. The scheme will undoubtedly attract the law abiding,
economically active who will see benefits in membership of such
a scheme. There is potential danger here, in the early years of
the scheme, of creating an underclass and adding to the policing
problems we already face. The scheme could become compulsory prematurely
for those disadvantaged members of society, because they would
have to have an ID Card in order to access Social Security Benefits,
etc. It should also be noted that many of the visible ethnic minorities
are over-represented in this socio-economically deprived group.
We have severe reservations that the scheme could add to tensions
at a time when the police service is investing greatly in gaining
confidence across all communities.
7. We fully understand and agree with the
proposal to introduce the scheme on an incremental basis and to
make it voluntary for the first few years. However, we believe
that economic forces will quickly dictate that the scheme becomes
compulsory even before government apply that sanction. As the
economically active see the advantages of belonging to the scheme
we believe that many commercial organisations will seek membership
of the scheme as a pre-requisite to offering their services. We
believe this will be particularly true of those offering financial
services where the ability to positively identify someone will
greatly reduce their risks of being defrauded. That is, after
all, one of the key concepts of the scheme which by its very nature
it is likely to bring a degree of compulsion which will only serve
to more rapidly disengage the disadvantaged as above.
8. We believe there would be advantages
in lowering the entry age into the scheme below the proposal of
16 years. Despite better security, there appears to be increasing
problems at (secondary) school gates, it may be shrewd to suggest
that it is done at that age (11?), and pupils could swipe into
and out of their own school thereby reducing the numbers of intruders,
incidents of excluded pupils causing disruption, etc. We see the
main benefits here geared towards child protection and vulnerable
young people although there are likely to be some spin offs in
the effective and efficient use of powers against anti social
behaviour. We would also wish to explore the potential of such
early entry in controlling the sale of alcohol, cigarettes and
fireworks to young people.
9. We agree that the carrying of an identity
card should never be compulsory nor do we seek powers for individuals
to produce their card on the spot. We do, however, see great potential
in a development of the National Identification Register and the
fact that people carry their biometric identity with them. As
the debates stands, the most likely form of biometric identity
will be either fingerprints or iris recognition. We would seek
powers for people to biometrically identify themselves in certain
circumstances.
10. This power would be particularly useful
where officers have evidence that an individual has committed
an offence for which they have power to arrest but where they
would rather proceed by summons. At the moment the arrest power
is granted by Section 25 of PACE. The power to identify someone
at the scene would give us greater confidence of serving a summons
or an FPN and should drastically reduce the number of arrests
and failed summonses. Eventually we would like to see this power
included in search powers where the officer has reasonable grounds
to search on the street. We would not press for this in the early
stages of the scheme, as it is likely to be controversial and
could damage its smooth introduction. However, we believe that
allied to a more intelligence led stop/search process it would
help create a background of fear amongst criminals and reassurance
amongst the greater community.
11. We see the scheme as being effective
in the fight against organised crime and terrorism in that both
rely heavily on false identities but also establish much of their
supporting infrastructure through legitimate means. The ability
to accurately identify people will make their working environment
much more hostile and would have a much greater deterrent effect.
We believe that many commercial firms will use the register to
confirm an individual's identity. We would like to see powers,
for police to obtain data from privately held schemes to enable
us to track the movement of individuals. Clearly such powers would
have to be closely controlled and limited to serious crime.
12. To the same end, the Metropolitan Police
would seek access to the National Identity Register under certain
controlled circumstances.
February 2004
63 -Identity card the Next Steps, Home Office SM6020. Back
| 
