Sir, David Blunkett (letter, Nov 23) is in denial that his beloved ID scheme has been dealt a fatal blow. His argument, essentially, is that it would not matter if even more data were lost from a national identity register because it would be useless to criminals without biometric authentication.

Leaving aside his incredible lack of respect for people’s privacy, or the fallibility of biometric technology, his comments demonstrate a remarkable inability to think things through. To require biometric authentication for every transaction would put an end to online banking. It would put an end to telephone banking. It would put an end to all online purchases and dealings where both parties are not present, and we would all be returned to a world of visiting travel agents to book our holidays.

Mr Blunkett’s dystopian world is not one that most people care to share.

Geraint Bevan
Glasgow

Sir, I would be more impressed with David Blunkett’s letter if he had not used the political-speak word “robust” no less than three times. Along with “transparent” and “let me make it clear”, this word triggers a mental switch-off and a need to turn to the crossword.

Mary Hodgson
Coventry

Sir, The Government from the start has sought to persuade people that its ID cards scheme is, as David Blunkett puts it, “simply about identity”. But an examination of the vast database behind the cards, which will build up a total life history of every individual, reveals that it is all about mass surveillance and social control. Biometric data is not as tamper-proof as he supposes, and 20 per cent of the population cannot be reliably identified by biometrics.

The HMRC fiasco proves that any assurances about the procedures and protection that will be in place are hollow; at the moment, those affected can change their bank account details, but when the National Identity Register is similarly compromised, we can hardly grow a new set of fingerprints.

Alexandra Hayes
Cambridge

Sir, Mr Blunkett makes no allowance for human nature. The ID card database will be accessible by very many authorised persons who have been authorised by others; their population will constantly change with joiners and leavers.

Mr Blunkett is mistaken in believing that because there will be a system, nobody will contravene it. We have laws governing us, but they are still infringed by many.

Sam Merchant
Woking, Surrey

Sir, David Blunkett points out the claim made by some that “ID cards could not survive” the “Datagate” debacle. Mr Blunkett claims: “This is simply a diversion by those who have never wanted ID cards anyway.”

I wonder whether his brushing aside these claims might be related to his position as a paid adviser to Texas-based security firm Entrust. The company has declared a formal interest in bidding to run Britain’s ID card scheme.

Mr Blunkett was formally bound by a two-year ban on lobbying after he left office. That ban expired this month.

Garrick Alder
Bedford

Explore Letters

• Feedback