FOIA Disclosure - OGC Gateway Reviews of the Home Office's Identity Cards scheme

Home Office
7th Floor, 50 Queen Anne's Gate, London SW1H 9AT
Telephone: 0870 000 1585
Fax: 020 7273 2065
Textphone: 020 7273 3476
E-mail: public.enquiries@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk
Web Site: www.homeoffice.gov.uk

address:

22 February 2005

Dear Mr XXX

FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST

I am writing further to my correspondence of 1 February regarding your
request for the Office of Government Commerce Gateway 0 Reviews (June
2003 and January 2004) and the earlier review conducted by the Home Office (March 2003).

I am writing to advise you that we have decided to disclose some but not all the information you requested.

Disclosed Information

We have decided to disclose some of the background information contained within the two Gateway 0 Reviews (June 2003 and January 2004). Please see the attachment.

Non-disclosed Information – relevant exemptions

As I advised in the correspondence of 1 February the following qualified exemptions apply, subject to the balance of the public interest test:

• s. 35(1)(a) and (3) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 (the Act)as the information relates to the development of government policy.
• s.33(1)(b) and (2) of the Act as OGC is a public authority with functions in relation to the examination of the economy, efficiency and effectiveness with which other public authorities use their resources in discharging their functions; and disclosure of the requested information would, or would be likely to, prejudice the discharge of those functions and disclosure by the Home Office would circumvent the statutory protection of the OGC's functions.

In applying these exemptions the Home Office has had to balance the public interest in withholding the information against the public interest in disclosing the information.

Public interest balancing test

The Home Office has now reached a decision on the balance of the public interest for information to which section 35(1)(a) and (3) plus section 33(1)(b) and (2) of the Freedom of Information Act 2000 apply.

We have carefully considered where the public interest test lies in this case and concluded that the balance is in favour of non-disclosure.

General considerations

An important consideration in respect of the information you have requested is that there is a very strong public interest in the success of the Identity Cards Programme. In particular, we have had regard to the extreme importance to the success of this programme being subject to an effective and prompt peer review process producing reports based on candid interviews for the benefit of
the Senior Responsible Owner.

A further important general consideration in the assessment of the public interest in dealing with your request was the clear public interest in maintaining the integrity of the OGC Gateway Process as an effective and prompt peer review process producing reports based on candid interviews for the benefit of Senior Responsible Owners and which has led to demonstrable value for money gains.

Additionally, we had regard to the information requested being information used in a live programme context, which will be subject to further Gateway reviews. We regard such information as engaging a greater public interest in non-disclosure than information that is not being so used.

The Public Interest in Disclosure

We considered a number of public interest considerations that would tend towards disclosure of the information requested:

(a) there is a public interest in members of the public being able to
contribute to the debates over the development of government
policy in respect of ID Cards.

(b) there is a public interest in transparency so to allow public
scrutiny of whether this programme is being managed effectively
and responding properly to information contained in Gateway
reports, including recommendations and issues connected to
Red/ Amber/ Green status; and

(c) there is a public interest in accountability so that there can be
public scrutiny and accountability in respect of this programme
as it would involve both considerable public expenditure and
potential public benefit.

We also considered a further public interest consideration that would tend towards disclosure of the information requested in that there is a public interest in transparency and accountability so that there can be public scrutiny of whether the OGC Gateway Process is effective in this highly important programme.

The Public Interest in Non-disclosure

The Home Office have considered a number of public interest considerations that would tend towards non-disclosure:

(a) there is a public interest in non-disclosure when disclosure of the information requested would (or would be likely to) inhibit
candour amongst future interviewees on the programme or other
projects;

(b) there is a very strong public interest in ensuring that
interviewees are able to be candid about matters which could
lead to serious recommendations being made to the Senior
Responsible Owner of the programme;

(c) there is a public interest in non-disclosure when disclosure of the information requested would tend to mean that the Gateway
reports would become (or be seen to become) less reliable
documents for the Senior Responsible Owner in the course of
her supervision of the programme;

(d) there is a public interest in non-disclosure when disclosure of
recommendations and related information may result in future
Gateway reports being consciously written for wider disclosure
publication rather than for the sole benefit of the Senior
Responsible Owner and so becoming less prompt, less robust or
more narrow/guarded in scope; and

(e) there is a very strong overall public interest in the content of
Gateway reports not becoming anodyne.

There is also a public interest in non-disclosure when disclosure would (or would be likely to) inhibit the exchange of views and accordingly adversely affect the formulation and development of Government policy on Identity Cards.

Outcome of the balancing exercise

We have decided that in respect of the information requested which is not being disclosed, any public interest in disclosure would be significantly outweighed by the public interest in non-disclosure, especially in view of the general considerations set out above.

However there is some information that can be disclosed which would meet the public interest in transparency without it being not in the public interest to disclose. This information is included in the attachment.

If you are dissatisfied with this response you may request an independent internal review. This can be done by submitting your complaint to:

Information Policy Team
Room 155
Home Office
50 Queen Anne's Gate
London
SW1H 9AT

Should you remain dissatisfied after this internal review, you will have a further right of complaint to the Information Commissioner.

Yours sincerely
AAA BBB

ATTACHMENT
Gateway Review 0 (June 2003)
Background

From July 2002 to January 2003 the Home Office carried out a widespread consultation on whether it should introduce entitlement cards, which some people call identity cards. A universal entitlement card scheme would:

(i) provide people who are lawfully resident in the UK with a means of
confirming their identity to a high degree of assurance;

(ii) establish for official purposes a person's identity so that there is one
definitive record of an identity which all Government departments can
use if they wish;

(iii) help people gain entitlement to products and services provided by both the public and private sectors, particularly those who might find it difficult to so do at present;

(iv) help public and private sector organisations to validate a person's identity, entitlement to products and services and eligibility to work in the UK.

By giving a clear indication that the holder of an entitlement card is lawfully resident in the UK, a card scheme could be a powerful weapon in combating illegal immigration. However, the potential benefits of an entitlement card scheme go much wider than an immigration control measure. It could provide a more efficient basis for administering public services by avoiding the need
for people to provide the same personal information time and again to a range of public services. There would also be savings for service providers as there would be a single definitive source of information about people's identity and possibly a unique personal number for everyone registered on the system.

A card scheme could also help prevent people becoming victims of identity theft and identity fraud. Identity fraud is estimated to cost the economy at least £1.3 billion every year and the level is rising. A card could also allow people to travel around Europe without the need to carry a passport book and might be useful to young people to help prove their age when purchasing agerestricted
goods and services.

The consultation paper set out a suggested scheme in which the photocard driving licence and the recently announced passport card would both be equally acceptable forms of entitlement card. It explained that it would not be possible to combine the exact format of both cards into one because of the specific requirements of the respective EU and international standards with which each card must comply. However, as the format of the UK passport card is yet to be decided, it will be designed to accord as closely as possible
with the format and layout of a photocard driving licence. Both would
therefore fulfil the functions of an entitlement card. As not everyone in the country qualifies for a driving licence or a passport these people will be offered a card at a lower cost than a passport or a driving licence which would look like a photocard driving licence minus the information on what vehicles the holder is entitled to drive.

In order to ensure that a card scheme would provide a greater level of
protection against identity fraud, it proposed that the checks currently undertaken for driving licence and passport applications should be strengthened. Another option, which the Government would like to explore, is the recording of biometric information as part of a card scheme. This could take the form of recording a fingerprint scan or the image of a person's iris (the coloured ring around the eye) as well as a digital photograph, which is already taken for passports and driving licences.

No Gateway reviews have been carried out on the scheme before, but an
assessment of its status had just been carried out on behalf of the Department by independent consultants. The report from this assessment was made available and it has been taken into account by the Gateway review team.

Gateway Review 0 (January 2004)
Background
The combination of greater mobility and advancing technology is making it increasingly difficult to protect and authenticate people's identity. As a result British citizens are facing growing threats to their security and prosperity from illegal migration and working, organised crime and terrorism, identity theft and fraud and fraudulent access to public services. Identity fraud has been
estimated to cost at least £1.3 billion every year. Biometric passports are already being developed in the UK, elsewhere in Europe and the US partly in response to this situation. The US has announced that a biometric will shortly be required for foreign nationals entering the US.

Following widespread consultation the Government has decided to build a base for a compulsory Identity Card scheme proceeding by incremental steps as a key part of a comprehensive strategy to contain these threats and to ensure more reliable means of authenticating people's identity. The proposals are being designed to protect people's true identity against fraud and to enable them to prove their identity more easily without unnecessary intrusion
by the State.

The first stage of the scheme will pave the way for the establishment of more reliable means of proving identity by:

• Establishing a National Identity Register;

• Proceeding towards more secure passports and driving licences based
  on biometric technology with personalised, specific identifiers;

• For those who do not need a passport or driving licence and choose to
  take it up, making available a voluntary identity card;

• Introducing mandatory biometric documents for foreign nationals
  coming to stay in the UK for longer than 3 months.

The costs of these steps and all start up costs are to be met from charging or existing departmental budgets. The introduction of the plain identity cards are planned to start in 2007/8 and together with the incremental roll out of biometric passports and possibly driving licences 80% coverage of the economically active population is expected within 5 years. Preparation activities include a 6 month biometric pilot by the Passport Service to test face, iris and fingerprint biometric information.

If the conditions are right the first stage of the scheme could then be followed by a move to a compulsory card scheme. This step will require full debate and a vote in both Houses of Parliament and will only be taken after a rigorous evaluation of the first stage and when there is high confidence that everything is in place to enable the scheme to work.

The Government's White Paper (Identity Cards - The Next Steps - Cm 6020) has indicated that once an OGC Review has confirmed that the programme is ready to proceed draft legislation will be published to enable the scheme to be introduced.