U.K. says cost of biometric ID scheme less than expected
In May the U.K. government said the cost of the national biometric ID scheme would be £5.75 billion over 10 years; now it says the cost would be £5.612 billion over the same period; main reason given is the expectation that fewer passports would be applied for
In its latest publication of the projected cost of the U.K. proposed ID card scheme, the Home Office has revealed it expects the figure to be £5.612 billion over the next ten years.
Under the Identity Card Act, the projection, which represents the total cost of providing ID cards and ePassports to U.K. and resident Irish citizens as well as to foreign nationals wishing to extend their leave in the country, must be provided by the government twice a year. These latest figures cover the period October 2007 to October 2017 and include the set up and operational expenses of the scheme. The Home Office’s latest estimates represent a reduction from its previous forecast of £5.75 billion, given in May 2007. It says this is the result of “greater understanding of the work required and current experience of the Identity and Passport Service (IPS).”
The government lists several reasons for the cost reductions. It has made an £85 million cut because of a reduction in the forecasts for the number of passports needed over the next decade due to customers delaying passport renewals. It is unclear why this is happening, but a Home Office spokesperson has said “it may be an impact from other forms of ID, like photo driving licenses, reducing people’s need for a passport.” It adds that a further cut is the result of a reduction in the estimated cost of producing and delivering passports and ID cards containing a fingerprint biometric of £100 million. The figures were also adjusted because of a different reporting period (October 2007-October 2017 rather than April 2007-April 2017).
In response to the latest costings, Dr. Edgar Whitley of the London School of Economics (LSE) Identity Project said: “While we welcome the projected cost savings associated with the recording and use of fingerprint biometrics, we remain puzzled by the lack of other savings associated with the decision to reuse existing government databases rather than build a new, secure National Identity Register from scratch. Similarly, we would have expected the decision to not use costly iris biometrics for the scheme at this time to have led to a significant decrease in the overall cost of the scheme.”
