Charles Clarke today accused the London School of Economics, a respected academic institution, of using the media to pursue a vendetta against Government plans for compulsory identity cards.

The Home Secretary described the leaked results of a study by the LSE, which suggested that identity cards would cost £300 each, as 'simply mad'. He was unable to put a firm price on the cost of the documents.

Mr Clarke said that he believed that the LSE's research team was running a deliberate scare campaign to further erode diminishing public support for the controversial proposals.

The Home Secretary told the BBC Radio 4 Today programme: "It [£300] is a complete nonsense figure. We are slightly caught with this London School of Economics work, because they have got this survey and they are dripping out bits of it.

"They haven’t shown it to us the full text at all, and they are really running a media campaign with scare stories of this type which it is very difficult for us to deal with.

"But what I can say is that the kind of figures that have been talked about in the media based on their briefings are total nonsense. People’s concerns about the costs I understand ... but these figures that are floating around are simply mad."

The Government has said that the cost of producing each card - described as the 'indicative unit cost' - will be £93, but it has not calculated what the final charge will be to the individual. It says the total cost of implementing the scheme, which the Treasury insists must be self-financing, will be £5.8 billion - which equates to just under £100 a head.

But, in a leaked report taken from a consultation document sent out by the LSE, the total cost of implementation is set at up to three times that amount, at between £12 billion and £18 billion. The £300 cost was derived by roughly dividing this by the 60 million cards which will eventually be required.

Mr Clarke said his department had not seen details of the LSE's work, despite what he claimed were numerous requests. The LSE has said the Home Office had refused to become involved with its six-month study until yesterday.

The idea of ID cards is popular with the public, but has caused alarm among civil rights groups. They are now opposed by the Tories, and have already been the focus of a revolt among backbench labour MPs. Today's row could dent public support for the cards, which the Government claims will help to prevent terrorism.

The legislation eventually cleared the Commons stages before the election but ministers did not attempt to push it through the Lords before May 5, aware it would probably fail.

The Bill is due to get its second reading in the Commons on June 28, in the first true test of mood since an almost identical Bill was abandoned at the end of the last session.

The LSE has not endeared itself to the government by publishing a report in March entitled Identity Card Legislation Must Be Abandoned, which said that the current proposals were 'too complex, technically unsafe, overly prescriptive and lack a foundation of public trust and confidence'.

However, the college today denied that it was pursuing and agenda and described the leaked findings of its latest study as the result of a serious body of work.

Professor Patrick Dunleavy, chair of the LSE's public policy group, told the BBC's The World at One: "This is not a figure that we have just plucked out of the air. It is a very serious body of work and designed to help the public have an informed and fruitful debate.

"We have no intention of sabotaging the scheme or raising any unnecessary problems."

David Davis, the Shadow Home Secretary who is currently against implementation of the ID card scheme, described the cost as a 'plastic poll tax'. He said: "This will mean that hard-working families with children will end up paying time and again for their ID cards and any changes that are made to their personal details.

"Charles Clarke should be honest about the real cost of the cards now, so that the British people can make an informed choice, based on the facts, not the Home Secretary’s bluster."

Howard Davies, the LSE's director, said: "The researchers involved have offered to discuss this work with the Home Office several times. Charles Clarke may not like the conclusions, but he has no basis to question the integrity of the LSE or those conducting the research."

The LSE draft identifies several areas where academics believe the Government might have underestimated the true cost of the project. These include:

• The Government estimates that each card scanner would cost £250-£750 but academics think the figure is likely to be £3,000-£4,000 a unit
• The Government believes that each card will have a ten-year lifespan but studies suggest that biometric data becomes less accurate over time. People might need to be rescanned every five years
• The LSE claims that the Government appears not to have factored in the "substantial" administrative costs of handling people who do not co-operate. "If human management is necessary to ensure changes are verified, this would add £1 billion-£4 billion to the ten-year roll-out of the scheme," the draft says

The LSE report noted: "The ongoing dispute over costs is due in large part to the fact that the Government is either not certain exactly what the ID infrastructure will entail, or is unwilling to disclose these details."

Explore UK News

• Crime News

• Education News

• Health News

• Scotland News

Times Recommends

• Should Knox’s trial even have reached the courtroom?
• All that glitters is not sold in Wright’s world
• Believe it or not, Big Brother is your friend