Government plans for identity management called into question

11 September 2008

The Government’s current review of identity management has been called into question by the Institution of Engineering and Technology (IET). A new fact file issued today (11 September) sets out a clear concept of identity which would be applicable to a National Identity Register (NIR).

The Government’s plans for both Identity Cards and Transformational Government have in the words of the IET ‘given rise to a great deal of heat and very little light’ on the subject of identity management.

IET chief executive, Robin McGill, said, “It is generally agreed that it is important to reform the processes of identity management in the UK as they are not fit for purpose in the 21st century. However, we believe the current Government plans are over complex and pay too little attention to the potential of technology to enhance personal privacy rather than diminish it.”

The factfile, Identity Management: Myths and Realities (PDF 99k), defines an ‘identity’. An identity is a description of an entity (in the example given, a specific human being) in the real, physical world. Examples of such descriptions are: Gordon Brown, James Gordon Brown, the current Prime Minister, a man with dark hair, born on 20 February 1951 in Govan, Glasgow, who lives at 10 Downing Street and so on.

Some of this is unique in that they clearly relate to one and only one human being; others are not unique but may be useful for some purposes. By combining descriptions which are not in themselves uniquely applicable to one human being one can derive a description that is so. HMG and other authorities recognise that full name, date of birth and current permanent address can combine to create a unique description of a single human being.

The problem occurs in the management of information. There is some formal recording and documenting by trusted third parties, some of which is imprecisely allocated and managed. Can identity be stolen? The IET fact file says, ‘No’. But identifying descriptions can be misappropriated and used fraudulently to enable one individual to masquerade as another. So-called identity theft is also often a legal misnomer.

Paul Davies, head of policy said, “We do need a National Identity Register but not for all the reasons currently being suggested. In reality, there should only be one role for the NIR and that is to manage the enrolment and maintenance processes of allocated IDs (identifying fact(s)). Similarly, there is absolutely no need for the NIR to hold more than a very few basic facts. Such a minimal NIR would only hold the agreed biometrics for each individual linked in each case to a unique but randomly chosen number. All that is required for operational purposes is the database entry sequence number, the chosen identifying number and some flags to block or suspend entries as part of the management process.”

Media enquiries to:

Mary Donovan
Head of Communications
Tel: +44 (0)1438 765587
Mob: +44 (0)7725 498117
Email: mdonovan@theiet.org

Robert Beahan
Press Officer
Tel: +44 (0)1438 767336
Mob: +44 (0)7590 776281
Email: rbeahan@theiet.org