While ministers have repeatedly rebuffed questions about the costs of the new virtual identity, government’s independent fiscal watchdog has cited a figure, but claimed that money has not been committed
The government has indicated that it “does not recognise” an estimate made by the Office for Budget Responsibility that delivering the UK’s new digital identity regime will require £1.8bn of funding – that does not currently exist.
In its most recent monthly Economic and fiscal outlook, the OBR states that “the implementation of digital ID cards is provisionally forecast to cost £1.8bn in total over the next three years”.
This figure is comprised of £1.3bn in upfront capital funding and £500m in day-to-day operational costs of programme delivery.
The OBR characterises this as an “unfunded cost”, for which “no specific funding has been identified” as yet.
“The government has announced its intention to meet the costs of this through existing [department] budgets, however no specific savings have yet been identified,” the outlook adds.
The subject of the likely costs of creating and implementing a new digital identity – which will mandatory for use in all employment checks by 2020 – has been subject to much scrutiny and speculation recently.
Related content
- Digital ID data will all be hosted in UK, minister claims
- UK territories and dependencies to be offered digital ID but will set own laws
- Government ‘considering physical alternatives’ for those unable access digital ID
During a recent evidence session of parliament’s Science, Innovation and Technology committee, MPs repeatedly pushed digital government minister Ian Murray for details of how much the new electronic ID will costs – and expressed frustration and incredulity at the lack of a precise answer.
But, shortly after this testy exchange, the OBR – an independent body sponsored by the Treasury to make public finance forecasts and scrutinise government policy – put out its figure of nearly £2bn in required funding in the coming three years.
However, ministers have now spoken out to refute the fiscal watchdog’s figures – and its claims that the programme is currently unfunded.
Asked in a written parliamentary question from Conservative MP Kevin Hollinrake for a breakdown of costs in each of the next three years, Cabinet Office minister did not provide such a figure – but reiterated that, whatever amount is required, it will be met from existing departmental budgets set at the spending review earlier this year.
“The number [from the OBR] was an initial, and early, estimate, spread over a number of years,” he said. “We do not recognise it as an accurate cost of the programme. Any costs in this spending review period will be met within existing settlements. The government will run a public consultation in the new year.”
The government has repeatedly indicated that the results of this consultation will inform the design of the platform and its use cases – and, therefore, its costs.
