Dear Sir/Madam,

I would like to add my – somewhat less weighty – voice to that of James Watson for an international database of DNA profiles for combating terrorism and serious crime. Although I prefer the idea of national databases, and doubt that DNA is the most suitable method for identifying someone not just reliably but also cheaply and conveniently, which is what is needed, when, for example, they are boarding a flight. (Take everyone's DNA fingerprint, says pioneer, 3 February 2003).

I too have concerns regarding the misuse of personal data, but they can be addressed, and are far outweighed by my concern for protecting society from terror attack and serious crime.

Crime flourishes in mass societies where the vast majority of people are strangers to each other and a tiny minority of criminals or terrorists are secure from detection in the anonymity of the crowd.

This situation has always been a major down side to the development of civilisation, but at long last, thanks to recent technological developments, we are now in a position to do something about it. Without having to go back to living in caves and small communities, we now have the means to change from anonymous society to “nonymous” society, in which everyone’s identity is known or readily ascertainable.

Some people are horrified at the prospect of being “known”, and insist on their “human right” to remain anonymous. Why? I ask myself, and can only assume that they must have something pretty horrible to hide, or think they do. In some cases their fears may be justified, but mostly they will be irrational, or based on misunderstandings of what personal information is actually involved and to whom and under what circumstances it will be made available.

Passports, identity papers, or in newspeak, "entitlement cards", and the like are inadequate, because they can be stolen, altered and misused or simply forged - as well as being cumbersome and inconvenient. What is needed is a much more reliable way of verifying someone's identity, quickly and cheaply, by comparing their finger print or iris scan with those kept of all citizens in a national databank. These cheap and convenient means of reliable identification need to be supplemented by DNA data, which comes into its own when seeking the identity of someone from a sample left at a crime scene.

Because legislation for a National Identity Databank will be very controversial and take a long time to get through Parliament - probably until a number of serious terrorists attacks has swung public opinion in its favour - I suggest that the government begins by establishing a voluntary one for those, like myself, who wish to participate and lead the way.

Currently there is stigma and much fear attached to the thought of one’s identity, especially in the form of a DNA profile, being stored in a government databank. That is because only the profiles of criminals and suspects are generally stored, most suspects, once cleared or eliminated from an inquiry, choosing to have their profiles removed. The stigma would be countered and eventually turned into a “mark of merit” (of someone with nothing to hide) by a voluntary databank.

Obviously, criminals and terrorists are not going to participate is such a project, but as more and more honest citizens do, the more any list of suspects can be narrowed down, and the easier the task of the police will become.

A National Identity Databank will have to come eventually. The sooner we start on it the better.