The latest wave of the Home Office data shows 56% approving of the “National Identity Service, including identity cards”, 27% opposed – a net approval of +29, down from +35 in their previous survey.

Meanwhile ICM’s poll for No2ID found 38% thought that ID cards were a good idea, 60% a bad idea – a net approval of -22, down from +2.

So both show opinion moving against ID cards, but overall opinion is vastly different. This is almost certainly down to the different way the questions are asked. In the Home Office polling respondents are first asked why they think the government is introducing ID cards, which will put them in mind of potential benefits of the card, and likely produces a higher approval rating. In No2ID’s polling, the likely cost of an ID card is mentioned in the question, which likely reduces the proportion of people who think it is a good idea.

As I’ve said before, polls commissioned by pressure groups are the ones I’d normally advise people to be the most wary of – the very worst skewed questions and selective approachs to polling tend to turn up in polls commissioned by pressure groups. No2ID are an exception to the rule – they have been asking the same question, using exactly the same wording, carried out in exactly the same manner and – vitally – releasing the data even when, like this month, it doesn’t show anything of particular interest or help to their cause. The question isn’t perfect since they can’t update it to take into account any newer estimates of cost without changing the question, but it does give rock solid trend data on attitudes towards ID cards.

Past polls on ID cards are here.

A second question asked about support for a national database of information about individuals and found 35% thought it was a good idea and 63% thought it was a bad idea, suggesting the database behind ID cards is rather less popular than ID cards themselves.

A smaller majority (55%) supported a centralised database of everyone’s health records, with 38% opposed. Opinion was even more evenly divided on the issue of ID cards and the biometic database that backs them up – 48% thought they were a good idea, 45% that they would be an unjustified invasion of privacy.

On the breadth of the DNA database public opinion a majority of people supporting the DNA database extending to eventually include the whole population, but only a bare majority of 51%, with a very substantial minority of 43% thinking only convicted criminals should have their DNA stored.

Finally YouGov asked about 42 day detention and David Davis’s by-election. 61% of people supported the police being able to detain suspected terrorists for up to six weeks before charging or releasing them, 33% thought 6 weeks would be far too long. This division of support seems pretty consistent amongst polls asking questions on whether people support or oppose the measure.

Asked about Davis’s stand, 49% of people thought he was right in his concerns over civil liberties, with 38% disagreeing with him – so while on the direct issue of 42 days people clearly don’t back him, once things like national databases and ID cards are thrown into the mix more people agree with him. However, of that 49% who back him, only 23% think things would actually be different were he home secretary, 26% think he would be just as bad.

Conservativehome meanwhile have another poll result from YouGov asking about the Davis by-election: 61% of respondents thought that Labour should have put a candidate up at the by-election, including a plurality (48%) of Labour voters.

The wording in the question was the same as used in the series of polls done for No2ID by ICM, so it is directly comparable to previous questions – back in September before the loss of benefit data the same question was showing 54% in favour and only 42% against, though it should be pointed out that the opposition isn’t unprecedented, a poll in July 2007 found a majority against cards.

Despite the drop in support for ID cards and the recent data loss incidents, the public still seem positive about other proposals whee data security would be an issue – 51% said they would be comfortable with the government building a database of everyone in the country including their fingerprints (48% were uncomfortable), 67% were happy with the government collecting travel information on British citizens going in and out of the country (31% were uncomfortable), 53% were comfortable with the idea of the government making a database with information on every child in the UK (45% uncomfortable). Only with the idea of allowing government departments to share information provided to one of them to others were a majority (52%) uncomfortable.

Meanwhile, a BPIX poll conducted last month for the Observer for a special on ten years of Blair as PM, shows the public recording a negative verdict on his premiership. Only 6% of people rated Blair’s record as very good, with 20% rating him as a good PM. 29% said average, 21% poor and 21% very poor.

27% of people think the UK is a more successful place now than in 1997, but 38% disagree. Only 10% think the UK is more pleasant, with 61% disagreeing. 69% think Britain is more dangerous, 58% disagree that Britain is happier. The only areas where people do think that Britain has improved in the last ten years is attitudes towards minorities – 35% think the UK is better for disabled people, with 21% disagreeing; 51% think it is better for people from ethnic minorities, with 16% disagreeing and 61% think it is a better place for gays and lesbians, with only 5% disagreeing, though of course, for some people with socially conservative views these may not necessarily be seen as positive ratings for Labour.

Asked how they have performed on specific policy areas the economy emerges as Labour’s only saving grace. 38% of people think they have handled it well, with only 27% thinking they have done poorly, a positive rating of 7. In every other area BPIX asked about they had a net negative rating, on education minus 27, the environment minus 22, public sector reform minus 42, NHS minus 43, crime minus 51, transport minus 53. The lowest net rating for for “cleaning up politics and sleaze” – only 5% thought Labour had done a good job, with 67% thinking they had done poorly.

Asked about Blair’s biggest achievement, 23% said the Good Friday Agreement in Northern Ireland, suggesting that perhaps Blair may yet have a positive legacy in the public’s mind in at least one area (although the poll was conducted about a week after the Northern Ireland assembly elections, so it was having a huge amount of publicity at the time). Second was Bank of England independence and the stable economy, both on 11%. His biggest failure was, unsurprisingly, unambigiously seen as Iraq – named by 58% of people.

Asked to rate how much they liked or disliked Blair himself on a 0-10 scale, 66% said they disliked him, with 26% saying they liked him. 56% of people said their opinion of Blair had become more negative over the last 10 years. When asked what words they associated with Blair, 49% thought he was too associated with spin, 45% out of touch, 43% untrustworthy, 38% insincere. The highest positive associations were “his own man” on 17%, competent 14% and principled 12%.

57% of people think that Blair has already stayed in office for too long, with a further 22% thinking a Summer departure would be about right. Only 9% think he is going too soon. And the future? 25% of respondents thought that history would treat Blair kindly and that he reputation would improve with the passing of time…35% of respondents thought it would get even worse.

50% of people said they were in favour of ID cards, with 39% of people opposed. This is very similar to the last two times YouGov asked the question.

Asked how much they would be willing to pay, only 11% of people said they would be willing to pay extra, although it may well be that people misunderstood the question. The wording asked how much people would be willing to pay for a combined biometic passport and ID card, given that passports currently cost £66, and I suspect some people interpreted as how much extra they would be willing to pay.

Of the 39% opposed to ID card, 25% think they will do more harm than good and 30% think they will be too expensive, but 43% say they are opposed on principle. The poll suggests that many of those people would refuse to co-operate once cards were introduced. 21% of those opposed to cards said they would refuse to have a card even if it meant paying a small fine, 7% said they would refuse even if it meant a long fine. 15% said they would refuse even if it meant a prison sentence.

This works out at about 17% of the population who say they would refuse to co-operate with the ID card scheme. Of course, a large proportion – probably a large majority – of this will turn out to be empty bravado. It is far easier to claim in a survey that you would be willing to go to prison rather than have a card than to actually go to prison. However, if even a small proportion of that 17% of people actually do stand firm then there could be a severe problem with non-compliance and media focus on “ID card martyrs” (not having an ID card will not be an imprisonable offence, but the ultimate punishment for not paying fines for not having an ID card would be).

The survey also asked about the national database that will back up the ID card system. 43% of people thought that the information held upon it would be accurate and reliable, but 48% thought it would not. 66% said they did not trust the government to keep such data confidential and 82% thought there was some danger than civil servants working on the data would divulge it improperly to others. Taking these things into consideration, 52% said they were unhappy about a national database 52%.

The survey also asked about CCTV cameras, also regularly cited in articles about increasing state surveillance, and in contrast to ID cards and the national database found strong support for them. 37% of people said that “CCTV cameras and so forth” made them feel they were being spied upon, but when asked if they approved or disapproved of CCTV in various places, approval was overwhelming. 97% of people approved of CCTV in banks, 93% on public transport, 86% outside pubs, 85% on high streets. The lowest support was for CCTV in taxis, but even then 65% of people supported it.

On other facets of the “surveillance society”, 72% supported photographing airline passengers, 56% of people supported roadside fingerprinting of alleged suspects, 50% supported speed cameras and 45% supported fingerprinting airline passengers (39% were opposed). A majority of those expressing an opinion of people (48% of people overall) were opposed to maintaining DNA records of people who have not been charged or have been acquitted, with 37% of people supporting it. The idea of using the chips within ID cards to track people’s movement met with sharp opposition – 70% said they would disapprove with only 16% approval.

Overall people are supportive, but uneasy, about increasing state surveillance. CCTV cameras have wide support, as do security provisions on flights (presumably because of memories of past terrorist atrocities). However, there are doubts about whether the national database will be secure or accurate and public attitudes towards ID cards are ambivalent – around half of respondents still support them, but a minority seem to be staunchly opposed to the extent that they claim they will be willing to break the law rather than accept them.

The latest poll shows that 47% of people think the introduction of ID cards would be a good idea, 51% think they would be a bad idea – a straight 5% swing compared to the last ICM/No2ID poll in February and the first time (apart from a very strangely worded BPIX question a year ago) that a poll has shown a majority opposed.

ICM also asked about attitudes towards the National Identity Scheme and the proposal that “everyone is required to attend an interview to give personal details about themselves for use by the police, tax authorities, and all other government departments.” 41% of people thought this was a good idea, 56% thought it a bad idea.

UPDATE: Lovely response from the government in the Evening Standard: “a Home Office spokesman said the poll might have given a more positive result if it had focused on the benefits of ID cards”. Yes, the poll almost certainly would have given a more positive response if, instead of using neutral wording, it have used leading text extolling the virtues of the ID cards.

Having asked people about whether they supported ID cards or not, YouGov gave people a list of arguments for and against ID cards. The pro-arguments met with somewhat mixed support – there was strong agreement that ID cards would help prevent benefit fraud (64% agree) and “health tourism” (62% agree) and with the statement that people with nothing to hide would have nothing to fear from ID cards (60% agree). A majority (55%) of people also thought that ID cards would help the police track down bogus asylum seekers attempting to avoid deportation. People were far more sceptical about whether ID cards would help catch criminals (43% agree, 45% disagree) or help make life more convenient or easier (42% agree, 43% disagree). A clear majority (63%) rejected the suggestion that ID cards would help prevent terrorist atrocities.

On arguments against ID cards, 50% of people thought that machines to read ID cards would often break or fail to read cards accurately and 55% thought a lot of cards would envitably end up containing false information – though given that some error and mechanical breakdown in any project this size would be enevitable, both these questions depend more on respondents’ definition of “often” and “a lot” than anything else. More importantly, 80% of people think that determined criminals would always find a way of forging the cards, 75% think the cards will be far more expensive than the government says, 60% say their introduction will cause huge inconvenience, 71% think the data on people’s cards will not be secure and will be hacked into, sold on, etc and 61% think the data would be passed on to foreign governments.

All in all, people are dubious about the arguments for ID cards, and broadly receptive about the arguments against them. Despite this they continue to support ID cards, implying that people give greater weight to the perceived benefits than the perceived drawbacks – yes, they think ID cards will be expensive, inconvenient and open to abuse, but they want them.

The London bombing had an immediate effect upon public attitudes towards ID cards, with a YouGov poll just a week later showing support back up to 50% (net approval of +12). Populus and ICM polls through July showed similar leaps in support, with ID cards once again enjoying the support of over 60% of respondents.

A new ICM poll for No2ID, the campaign against ID cards, seems to indicate that support is back on a downwards trend. In June 2005 ICM/No2ID found that 55% of people thought ID cards were a good idea, while 43% thought they were a bad idea. ICM asked the question again this week, using identical wording, and found that 50% of people thought they were a good idea, while 47% thought them a bad idea.

Many people are (reasonably enough) suspicious about polls commissoned by pressure groups for campaigning purposes. In this case though, it is trend that matters – both polls were carried out using the same methodology, and the same wording and are therefore directly comparable. The poll suggests that levels of support for ID cards have returned to the levels we saw prior to the London bombings and that the rise in support was a purely temporary reaction to the bombing, furthermore support for them may still be falling.