Home Office small print causes stir

UNDER TERMS previously whispered in the dark corners of the Home Office, the government will be allowed to search the premises of companies working on the National Identity Scheme (NIS).

A leaked Home Office document clearly states that if suppliers do not comply with the strict security requirements of the terms of the NIS contracts, then at its "sole discretion" their premises can be investigated, including searching though records, computers and other property.

IBM, CSC, EDS, Fujitsu and Thales are the five companies in contention for the national ID-card scheme contracts.

A spokesperson from the Home Office said, "Robust data protection is central to the National Identity Scheme and it is only right and proper that we reserve the right to check that any companies involved in delivering the scheme are properly protecting individuals' information."

Phil Booth, the national coordinator of NO2ID, a group campaigning against the government's planned ID card and the National Identity Register, said, "This is something quite extraordinary. We are talking about something that is at the sole discretion of the Home Office, and entering people's houses. Every single person working on this project should be aware of this."

Invasive as this is, and well-known by the companies it should have been, the Home Office claims that the agreement does not permit access to the private premises of staff working for the NIS contactors.

The Home Office spinner said that this agreement was really nothing new, and that it is common practice in this type of contract.

"This agreement does not grant the Identity and Passport Service or the home secretary new legal powers, and is appropriate in the protection of sensitive information," he said.

Booth isn't a happy bunny as he points out that the clause in question would affect the services that companies can provide to other clients, as when searching through NIS data who knows what other information the Home Office might come across?

"Putting in heavy-handed clauses does not deal with the systemic and cultural problems of data-protection in government at the moment. They seem to treat our data as if it is their own, to do with as they see fit." µ

L'Inq
ZDNet