I wonder if the following influences his thinking

http://observer.guardian.co.uk/politics/story/0,,2042271,00.html

David Holden, Chester,

Perhaps, rather ironically, the safest method for transferring the information was by CD. This prevented the data being intercepted during electronic transmission. That the data did not arrive at its intended destination has little to do with electronic security, and everything to do human frailty.

Callum, Edinburgh,

Mr Blunkett claims that the ID database "is simply about identity". He does not seem to understand the monster that he has helped to create.
The ID database will contain up to 50 pieces of information on you, including your address, fingerprints, driving license number, passport number and National Insurance number [See Section 1 of the 2006 bill]. This information will be invaluable to fraudsters.
In addition, the database will contain a record of every time your ID card is checked, including when you visit your GP or hospital, enter or leave the country, visit your bank, spend a large amount of money, start a new job etc [See the Regulatory Impact Assessment http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/documents/ria-identity-cards-bill-251104]. This is not about identity - it is about turning Britain into East Germany.

Jonathan Harris, London,

Mr Blunkett claims that the ID database "is simply about identity". He does not seem to understand the monster that he has helped to create.
The ID database will contain up to 50 pieces of information on you, including your address, fingerprints, driving license number, passport number and National Insurance number [See Section 1 of the 2006 bill]. This information will be invaluable to fraudsters.
In addition, the database will contain a record of every time your ID card is checked, including when you visit your GP or hospital, enter or leave the country, visit your bank, spend a large amount of money, start a new job etc [See the Regulatory Impact Assessment http://www.homeoffice.gov.uk/documents/ria-identity-cards-bill-251104]. This is not simply about identity - it is about turning Britain into East Germany.

Jonathan Harris, London,

Whenever a lot of sensitive data is put into a single database to which many people have access, it is inevitable that the data it holds will be put at risk by human error.

The HMRC fiasco is an example of this and one that most people will immediately recognise as 'putting all ones eggs in the same basket'. For most people, avoiding such situations is no more than common sense..

But not, it seems, for Mr Blunkett, since his solution for such problems is to create an even larger database that will put all 50+ million of us at risk! He then pontificates about biometrics but conveniently ignores the fact that they are unproven on this scale and so expensive that few, if any, ID card uses will ever employ them (even if they do work).

No, Mr Blunkett, your pet project has only survived this long because you have shamelessly exaggerated its value whilst hiding its extreme dangers. You should go back to being an MP - as a security expert you are complete rubbish.

B Gladman, Worcester, UK

"That so few people understand this is the problem that government faces"

It could just be that it is a problem the government don't understand.

There are none so blind as those that will not see...

Mike Poulsen, Reading, Berkshire

Many of us suspected, quite rightly it now turns out, that the loss of the CDs, would be turned into an excuse to foist a biometric database upon us. Mr Blunkett, you forgot didn't you, democracy means Govts are accountable to people not vice versa?

Penny, Swansea,

As other have pointed out http://brighton.no2id.net/?p=11 Blunkett works for Entrust: his financial interests served by perpetuating the bogus need for ID cards, so is his political reputation.

As usual with politicians patronising those who understand the issue better, Blunkett doesn't understand that information about an individual is distinct from their identity. If perfect biometrics IDs existed, and were perfectly implemented, and if every request from everywhere for data transfer or use on an individual were conditional on that perfect biometric being present then this headline would not have occurred.

That is not the system this government intends to introduce. No amount of biometrics would have stopped one civil servant from transferring it to another. And if it leaked, the ID Card system envisaged by the government would not prevent the abuse of that data by ID fraudsters.

Blunkett should stop selling phoney American ID snake oil for a personal profit.

David Harris, Brighton, UK

DB says, 'The database is simply about identity...'

Once again it is DB who seems to have never understood that IDcards/NIR is NOT simply about 'identity', it is about OWNERSHIP and CONTROL of identity; personal identity---yours and mine. Does my identity belong to me or to the state? 'ID cards' per se may be a very useful tool in protecting me identity, but not in the form proposed and rolled up in the NIR. A fiasco and disaster of truly epic proportions, and the ministers, lackies, blunder on, dragging us all with them.

Adair, Beverley,

Would this be the same David Blunkett who works for Entrust - an encryption company which has already expressed an interest in tendering for the ID cards project?

Michael, London,

Blunkett once again highlights the key failure in this episode. Career politicians do not understand the most basic concepts of modern working life. Most 13 year olds know the basics of how to encrypt data. Blunkett seems only to have grasped the importance of this 'in the three years since [he] was Home Secretary' .Tony Blair couldn't even use email and every time a minister opens their mouth about IT it is patently clear they do not know what they are talking about. Until we have people in office who have a rudimentary grasp of the basic concepts required to function in the modern world all the systems and process below them will continue to be as inept as they are.

Peter, Cambridge, UK

Blunkett does not understand individual freedom. Maybe we don't want to give our identities to the state. The state is often incompetent as has just been amply demonstrated. Future state systems may be just as bad. Then there is the possibility of a malevolent state.
Set against this the deep psychological feeling of our identities being ours, not theirs.
Whatever the system, it will have inaccuracies. We never hear of a mechanism for righting errors. As we now know, some errors cannot be righted.

Mike Sedgwick, Eastleigh, UK

Hackers can not only get information out of insecure systems - they can put information in.
First get a secure system up and working and then sell it to us.

Rosemary Roberts, Germany,

sorry, mike... blunkett may be wrong about many things, but he is absolutely right about this. people can steal information, they cannot steal your biometric or dna imprint. to see the proposed system as giving your identitiy to the state is ridiculous; it's just the opposite, it enables you to prove your identity beyond any doubt. even if someone else gets hold of the database information, they can't pretend to be you. however, if they get hold of other info and pretend to be you, the system will be able to prove they are not.

there is no loss of freedom here. your freedom is curtailed by the anti-social and nefarious activities of other people. this will prevent that and give you more freedom.

the only way it will work is if it is compulsory and covers 100% of those present in the country. and think how many other problems that would solve. the only loss of liberty will be the liberty to be a criminal.

jem, london, uk

But does that nice Mr. Blunkett actually believe that security is the point? The ID card is something that the Russian thought police (MVD, KGB, NKVD, etc.) would have given their eyeteeth for - because it will allow any government total control over every citizen at all times. That is why no Briton will ever accept the ID card.
Ken LUTON, Beds

K. N. Mackenzie, LUTON, Beds, UK

Your argument might carry more weight were it not for the fact that you receive moneys from Entrust who would like a piece of the profits that will flow from the ID car scheme. interesting how that little bit of data never made it into your letter.

Donavon Pfeiffer Jr, Saco, Maine, USA

This week, we have seen how efficient and careful this government is in protecting our "identity". But Mr Blunkett now expects us to roll over and accept his pernicious identity card scheme, hand over masses of personal data, our biometrics and then pay a hundred quid per head of the privilege. It is beyond comprehension that he seriously expects us to entrust our identities and provide an audit trail of our lives to a dishonorable government and bureaucrats of proven incompetence.

Mr Blunkett and those of a similar mind should have their identity card scheme if they want the government to protect their identities. Meanwhile, the millions of citizens who are far more sagatious should be permitted to decline this facility and tell the government where they can slot their ID cards.

S Foster, Doncaster, Doncaster

Mr Blunkett asserts that the ID database will have an "absolutely robust form of identification". However, the House of Commons recently rejected using biometric identification for MPs because, according to them, the biometric system was not a robust form of identification. If Mr Blunkett is so certain of the biometric identification system, then I am sure he will be the first to agree that the obvious way to demonstrate that it is absolutely robust is to roll out ID cards to MPs, and to hand over access to the House of Commons to an entirely automated system based on the biometric cards.

Paf Turner, London, UK