Canceling U.K. national ID scheme will save £400 million annually
If start up costs of £300 million are included, the U.K. National Identity Scheme will, over a decade, cost government and citizens around £4.3 billion more than the cost of current passports
The U.K. government could save around £400 million each year if it canceled identity cards and stuck with the current generation of passports, according to Home Office figures. Kable reports that if start up costs of £300 million are included, the U.K. National Identity Scheme looks set to cost government and citizens around £4.3 billion more than the cost of current passports over a decade. This is more than triple the £1.31 billion specific cost of identity cards over a decade released by the Home Office earlier this week. This is because the £400 million annually also includes the cost of adding fingerprints to passports — the current ones include only digitized photos — the costs to the rest of government of the National Identity Scheme and the charges made to individuals for having their biometrics taken.
The figures were released in an impact assessment signed by Home Secretary Jacqui Smith and placed in the House of Commons library on 6 May 2009. This also says that the scheme will eventually generate annual benefits of £900 million to £1.6 billion. These benefits would total £9 billion to £17 billion over 30 years, measured on a discounted basis, compared with total discounted costs of £7 billion. This will produce a net benefit of £2 billion to £10 billion, with the midpoint, £6 billion, quoted by Jacqui Smith in a speech last week.
The Home Office says the benefits will come from time savings to individuals in dealing with government and business, more efficient processes for government and business, and reduced costs from identity related fraud.
“It is crazy to fritter away billions of pounds on an unnecessary and intrusive ID card scheme during the biggest crisis in public finances for a generation,” said Liberal Democrat shadow home secretary Chris Huhne. “Only the most profligate of governments would stick with this ridiculous plan when costs are spiraling out of control. It shows just how out of touch ministers are that they think charging people through the nose to invade their privacy is acceptable.”
