EU driving licences: UK calls for multi-use, interoperable, licences
The UK Department of Transport has put out a consultation paper on the European Commission's proposal for new-style EU driving licences. The EU proposal calls for driving licences to be renewed every 10 years (as distinct from up to 70 years old, then renewed every 5 years in the UK). The Commission also proposed that the new licences should be plastic card with a microchip carrying a photograph of the holder and the use of data would be strictly limited to the purpose for which it is gathered, to that of a driving licence.
The consultation paper proposes to go much further. First, by including "fingerprint or iris recondition" on the chip. Second, it is opposed to limiting the use of the data collected to that of a driving licence. The paper says this would:
"not allow the full potential of the technology to be exploited; it would restrict interoperability with other smart card applications; and it would require the public to pay for several cards"
It also argues that the restriction limiting the use of the micro-chipped driving licence would make it difficult to develop: "a business case on the basis of driving licence use only" and this would not allow: "the full potential of the technology to be exploited". "Interoperability" is jargon for one card having several uses (eg: passport, driving licence, identity card or for business, credit and cheque cards).
Quote in full from paper:
"There could be large advantages from providing some limited flexibility in the content of the chip. Biometric information (such as fingerprint or iris recognition) on the chip would increase driving licence security. The restrictions proposed by the Commission would make it difficult to develop a business case on the basis of driving licence use only. This would not allow the full potential of the technology to be exploited; it would restrict interoperability with other smart card applications; and it would require the public to pay for several cards....
Do you think there would be benefits in allowing flexibility so that, in future the one plastic card could have other uses?"
Tony Bunyan, Statewatch editor, comments:
"The clear direction of numerous proposals at national and EU levels is for the introduction of a single biometric micro-chipped card which can serve a multitude of purposes for the state and commercial businesses. The dangers for privacy and civil liberties are monumental especially as, in practice, EU data protection laws offer little or no protection against the misuse and abuse of personal data."
UK consultation paper on the European Commission's proposal for a directive on driving licences (pdf)
EU driving licences to be renewed every 10 years and new security features added each time
Statewatch coverage of the European Commission proposal, December 2003
The European Commission has put forward a proposal to amend the existing Directive on driving licences (91/439/EC) which would mean that it would be mandatory for driving licences to be renewed every 10 years. At present the majority of countries either have no time limit (Austria, Belgium and Germany) or a set time limit (eg: up to 70 years of age in the UK).
There is merit in the Commission proposals to replace the different forms of driving licence with a standard format, introducing standards for testing and age qualifications for certain categories of vehicles. However, the Commission also argues that it necessary to harmonise the form of driving licences by abolishing paper licences and replacing them with by plastic cards which may include a microchip holding data on a driver which has to be renewed at least every 10 years.
It is argued that this is this is necessary for people to travel and move country more easily and complete the "free movement of citizens". Overall it is estimated that 60% of the population of the EU, around 200 million people, hold driving licences. However, the great majority do not move to live in another EU state or drive from country to country (except for road haulage), so it would seem that this proposal is disproportionate with the imposition of standards for all which only affect a minority in practice. As there is already the "mutual recognition" of licences between states the introduction of a standard format would seem to meet the perceived need.
The real reason for 10 year renewal, with the latest security features being added each time, is because "after 11 September 2001" (page 3) there is a need for "anti-fraud protection". In other words it is another response to the "war on terrorism" wrapped up as "anti-fraud protection".
The 10 year renewal of driving licences is, in official speak, called, "limited administrative validity", which will "allow the anti-fraud protection of all licences to be continuously updated" ("state-of-the-art security features") and allow "updating the photograph on the licence at the same time" which would give "a recent likeness of the holder".
The data on the microchip will be "limited to the function of a driving licence" and "ensure protection of the data and information relating to the citizen". While initially the data on the microchip may be limited to that on the paper licences there can be no limit on access to the data held (national vehicle licensing centre data is ....). Moreover the technical specifications will meet "future interoperabililty", which could mean "interoperability" between countries or between new functions.
The 10 year renewal period is the "maximum" leaving it open to governments to introduce shorter periods (eg: every five years). An age limit will be set at 65 years of age when the licence can only be renewed for a maximum of 5 years. Thus:
"all documents in circulation will be updated regularly, using the most up-to-date security features"
Hidden in the detail (on page 70) it states that:
"With the specific written agreement of the holder, information which is not related to the administration of the driving licence or road safety may also be added in this space"
Would information related to "road safety" include a person's medical records? Or perhaps their criminal record? What data "not related" to "road safety" is envisaged? The term "specific written agreement" seems cast-iron but what if it was mandatory for certain data to be included in order to get a new licence, would this constitute "informed consent"? For example, to book an airline ticket online to the USA a number of airline insist that a person ticks the box consenting to their details being handed over to US security agencies, if you do not agree then you cannot book online.
Tony Bunyan, Statewatch editor, comments:
"The Commission proposals contain a number of positive ideas. But the maximum 10 year renewal period, with new state-of-the-art security features being added each time, is being driven by the "war on terrorism". The law enforcement and commercial (who stands to make big profits from regular renewals) interests will be the major beneficiaries. Moreover, the notion that the data on the microchip will only be used for licence purposes is nonsense. It will be accessed by national police and security agencies and via the Schengen Information System.
The 10 year renewal period will mean that a person throughout their lifetime might have to check in with the authorities five or six times up to the age of 65 then every 5 years thereafter.
Like biometric documents for resident third country nationals, visitors with visas, EU passports, the EU health card, and new national ID schemes this proposal contributes to the introduction of the wholesale surveillance of the population"
Proposal for a Directive on driving licences: COM 621 final (pdf)
1. Proposal for EU health card: Report
2. The road to 1984 biometric documents for visas and resident third country national: Biometric documents
4. Statewatch's Observatory on Surveillance in Europe: SOS Europe
Statewatch News online | Join Statewatch news e-mail list | Download a free sample issue of Statewatch bulletin
Statewatch does not have a corporate view, nor does it seek to create one, the views expressed are those of the author.
Statewatch is not responsible for the content of external websites and inclusion of a link does not constitute an endorsement.