by Sharon Norris
Last month the US Government changed its regulations on people entering the country. From now on visitors from the 27 countries previously not required to hold visas will have to carry a passport containing a digital photograph. This applies to all new passports issued on or after 26th October. From October 2006, visitors will be required to carry biometric passports. Both these schemes are the result of the 2001 US Patriot Act, which was introduced in the wake of the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
In Britain too, the escalation in global terrorism is one reason why the Government wants to introduce identity cards. However, the plans have met with strong opposition, not least of all because of the proposed cost of the scheme. In an attempt to allay fears, the Home Secretary Charles Clarke recently agreed to a £30 "standalone" card, but it is still unclear how much the combined 10-year passport and identity card package will cost. While the Government estimates this will be £93, academics from the London School of Economics have put the figure nearer £300.
It is not just the cost of ID cards that has caused concern. Civil liberties groups such as the charity Liberty are worried by the implications of the state's having more information than ever about its citizens, and questions have been asked both about the nature of the information the cards will store, and who will have access to this. Such was the concern in the Commons when the plans were debated that the Government saw its majority slashed to 31.
... questions have been asked both about the nature of the information the cards will store, and who will have access to this.
Many new technologies have raised issues for civil liberties campaigners. The success of DNA profiling in helping to track down criminals has led to calls from some quarters for everyone to be profiled - although this is unlikely to happen. Similarly, the mapping of the human genome, which allows predictions to be made about a person's predisposition to certain illnesses and their life expectancy, has worried many people, who fear the consequences if this kind of information were to be accessible to employers or life insurance providers.
Some new technologies also have the potential to alter the relationship between individuals and the state, and have implications for both individual and collective identities. Professor John Curtice (PDF, 25.2KB) from the University of Strathclyde is one of the researchers involved in the ESRC's Identities and Social Action Programme, which seeks to examine how people define their identities. In recent years many of the factors that traditionally have given people a sense of identity, such as families, social class and work have become less influential. Professor Curtice's project, 'Are Traditional Identities in Decline?' looks at whether newer forms of identity, such as those based on education or nationality, have taken their place. He argues that identity cards are "less about surveillance than Government trying to foster a sense of community in the face of terrorism", though he acknowledges that they are increasingly being promoted as a means of avoiding identity fraud. He argues that one reason for the Government's appealing to a common sense of Britishness, is that the Labour Party itself is no longer able to appeal to a collective identity among its supporters, based on class loyalty.
Professor Curtice is also involved in another ESRC Research Programme, e-Society, which looks at the ways in which institutions, practices and behaviours are being changed by digital technologies. Although he agrees that ID cards raise questions about the relationship between the individual and the state, he believes there is also an issue about the responsibility states have to their citizens when faced with terrorist attacks. While he thinks it is too early to speculate about what impact ID cards will have on identity-formation in the longer-term, there is one area where he anticipates they could have an impact. He argues: "Insofar as we are increasingly being asked to prove who we are, then there could be a more general issue in the longer term as to the extent to which we are able to trust each other, and this could have broader implications for society".