NO2ID

This short podcast with Katie Davies, the Executive Director of Strategy at the IPS is worth a listen.

Overview of NIS
- Primary focus of NIS is allow individuals to prove who they are when they are needed
- Claim that recognise the need to consult more widely
- Implementation strategy must be benefits led - help individuals and businesses do what they need to do better
- Aim in the long term - being able to prove who you are in a safe and secure way to protect and make life easier for individuals
- Individuals should own their identity
- Prevent misuse
- Protect family and those in care
- Protect the community (prevention of benefit fraud; crime prevention - admit that NIS is not a silver bullet)
- Making life easier - cited the example of her nanny who has recently had to change her name as a result of marriage; change of address etc - NIS would allow her to do that only once

Program status
- Strategic action plan published end 06
- Now looking at delivery of the SAP
- Focusing on particular customer groups to identify their needs and benefits from the scheme
- Looking at the implementation partners
- Working with BIA e.g. for Visas (process underway and have already identified fraudulent claims)
- As at end 2007 - 4000 potentially fraudulent visa applicants identified
- Biometric resident permits to come for foreign nationals - claim received positive feedback. Will be issued ID cards in 2008
- ID cards for British citizens in 2009. Focus on those that need them

Government's ability to deliver
- Increased focus in government to develop the skills and capabilities to deliver large scale systems
- Seen some success at IPS e.g. new e-Passport delivered on time and to budget
- Rollout of interviews
- Has taken time to define specifications
- Plan to use "tried and tested" technology
- Will support chip-and-pin terminals
- Build on things already done e.g. passport validation service used by banks today (but admits that this does not prove that the person is who they claim to be - only the document)

Looking at use for Internet-based services

Believe that in many day-to-day interactions will not require biometrics for identity assurance

Claim vision is structured around benefits to individuals

Mention possible use of mobile phones in the future - do not want to be technology dependent

Getting people to buy in, given issues such as large scale data loss by goverment
- Believe recent events are actually helpful to the IPS - highlight privacy and trust issues to remind the IPS that they need to protect individuals' information and be rigorous.

Will be recruiting the scheme commissioner by the end of the year

Agrees that objective to minimise data storage - claim that the consistent use of a single identity demonstrates this.

Claims the NIR is a "very thing register" simply ties biographical information to biometrics

Communicating benefits to the public. Example of young people - important to IPS in future. Young people need to prove who they are - open bank account; join a gym!
Claim young people will be able to take control and ownership of their identities and use in a variety of circumstances

Rather different from the leaked documents.....

Not sure I would agree. She went to some lengths to stress the focus on particular groups rather than the broader approach originally suggested; talked about "trusted" individuals, which was referenced in the leaked documents; talked about young people which was referenced in the leaked documents.

She also discussed degrees of identity assurance and the fact that biometrics wouldn't be required everywhere, which again fits with the backtracking from fingerprints in the leaked documents

I'll admit the presentation smoothed out some of the jagged edges but digging under the marketing gloss I thought it rang true with my reading of the leaked document.

Seconded -- Ms Davies's points (in your transcript, for which thank you) are bang in line with the copy of the leaked document obtained by No2ID.

From the transcript:


Three references:

1. IDABC, July 2005:

2. Home Secretary, the New Normality, September 2007:

Flanagan report due out next week ...

3. Dematerialised ID

Wed, 30 Jan 2008 20:27:00 was me

No it isn't. Nothing in it contradicts the leaked documents. Presumably because it is for public consumption, it is in a different order, and carries a different emphasis. In fact, the overview neatly fulfils the prediction in our note at the foot of p1 of the published "Options" document:

"Expect more appeals to public fears, particularly about safety of children"

David Moss, I sincerrly doubt they are thinking about the same use of "mobile technology" as you. All indications are that this refers to mobile I/O devices linked to the NIR for the use of the database state. The only interest in your mobile phone is that it is duly registered with the authorities, and its purchase neatly linked with "your identity". (See Regulatory Impact Assessment to the Identity Cards Bill, 25th Nov 2004, s47(ii).)

Looking for common themes -- in this case mobile device technology -- linking separate facts, abstracting, and formulating a hypothesis, which may be tested against other facts and which may be disproved by them, is normal scientific practice. Scepticism is essential and I heartily concur with your doubts.

The NIS is itself a hypothesis. But a non-scientific one. It continues to be advocated by the government and the civil service despite having been disproved.

The NIS cannot deliver any of its stated objectives. It is a waste of our money and the government's political capital. In that, it is not alone. There is a semi-interesting debate going on at the moment on the Guardian website, if anyone fancies pratising how to campaign against unreason ...

So basically we will need to prove our right to exist in "many day to day business transactions".

What is a "day to day business transaction"? Buying stamps at the post-office? Buying a bus or train ticket? Buying a loaf of bread at Tescos? Buying a newspaper from your local shop?

Indeed, all of these are "day to day business transactions". If the NIR expands to its inevitable conclusion (and the current legislation allows for further expansion of categories of information on the database) the government will have an extensive audit of what you bought and when you bought it. In short, we will be completely at the mercy of whoever happens to occupy Whitehall in the future.

This is beyond abstract arguments about privacy; this is the implementation of the apparatus of a police state.

I just saw this
http://www.exec-appointments.com/jobs/v ... p?id=99854

Job ad for "Director of the Government IT Profession, six figure salary", which was Katie Davis' previous job until June 2007. Does this mean it has been rudderless for the last six months?