Questioning about the "100,000 yen bid" for JAPAN-VISIT demonstration experiments

Original publication date: May 4, 2006

Biometric information system for Immigration linking US-VISIT and JAPAN-VISIT (April 22) ― In this blog entry, I reported on revelations that a company named Accenture, who is managing a system in the U.S. called "US-VISIT" for collecting biometric information from fingerprinting and mug shot data, was set to implement a Japanese equivalent called "JAPAN-VISIT". After I posted this entry, I received a large response. The blog entry was something I had written after having asked questions during the question period in the House of Representatives Committee on Judicial Affairs on April 21st. I was waiting until the conference minutes were uploaded to the homepage of the House of Representatives, which finally happened yesterday. I am now posting the part that might be of interest to those who are following this issue closely. (If you have not read the April 22 entry of this blog, please read it before you read the proceedings of the questioning period.)

Hosaka Nobuto

This is a bill that was passed against the will of those of us who were hoping to continue the debate in this committee. Back then, I argued in the committee with Vice Minister Kouno about the revision of the legacy system. Although not expected to reach a scale of one trillion yen like the online system of the Social Insurance Agency, the legacy system of the Immigration Bureau, designed and operated by Hitachi ― a "System Reform Investigation" [Sasshin Kanousei Chousa/刷新可能性調査] has been done on this. I'm sorry this an extremely easy question, but can you tell me, which company conducted this investigation, which company is it?

Vice Minister Kouno

I understand that it is Accenture Japan Limited.

Hosaka Nobuto

I believe this is also clearly stated in the "System Reform Investigation Report" [Sasshin Kanousei Chousa Houkoku/刷新可能性調査報告書] posted on the Justice Ministry website. It's very clearly stated and made publicly available. And also, I've heard that Accenture is currently working on the plan for a system project called "Optimization Project" [Saitekika Keikaku/最適化計画] which is going to be proposed at the end of April, for which final details will be worked out sometime this month. What have they been ordered to do? What is the substance of this project, what on earth is this about?

Vice Minister Kouno

It is a formulation for optimizing operations of the immigration authority and the immigration control system.

The focus is to consider how to consolidate a framework for information system management; how to reform the current so-called "legacy system" and replace it with a next-generation open system, for which we need to think about what kind of system could serve as a common infrastructure.

After that, another pillar of the project is the introduction of a system, related to antiterrorism measures, to stop terrorism and prevent crime and illegal residency using biometric information. The project also investigates these areas.

And then there are also electronic application procedures: computerizing the various application procedures for permissions to stay, improving the functionality of Internet-based information services, installation of call centres, upgrading and expanding these kinds of response systems.

Finally, the fourth pillar is related to analysis and information collection: furthering information sharing and improving and strengthening intelligence capabilities, increasing the efficiency of fact-finding surveys using position information systems as well as increasing the efficiency of operations for investigating illegal activities. The project will report on these kinds of areas.

Hosaka Nobuto

Thank you very much.

I have distributed documentation, a paper called "Summary of the Investigation of the Low-price Bid" [Teinyuusatsu kakaku chousa no gaiyou/低入札価格調査の概要], to each committee member here today. This was a contract for development and demonstration experiments of software to handle a system for IC passports using biometric information, including the automatic gate system we discussed yesterday, as well as for the certification equipment and automatic gate system. Believe it or not, the price of this system is 100,000 yen. This is so cheap that a hearing was held on the topic by the Secretariat of the Minister of Justice, Accounts Division. Can you please talk about this hearing?

Vice Minister Kouno

At the Justice Ministry, based on the provisions of an act regarding accounting, in the case of competitive bidding on contracts for construction, manufacturing, etc. with an estimated price exceeding 10 million yen, at the time of competitive bidding, if the bidding price is lower than a given percentage of the estimated price ― i.e. in cases in which the tendered bid is too low to meet this required percentage ― since there is a possibility that the contract will not be adequately implemented, an investigation is conducted to establish its feasibility. The matter you have indicated was a case of this.

The company the Justice Ministry awarded the contract to, Accenture Japan Ltd., has demonstrated its know-how regarding the design of systems using biometric information certification technology. In order to attract new potential clients, notably in the area of homeland security, in the case in question, the company bid at this strategic price as part of its business strategy. Based on this and on the fact that Accenture was judged capable of adequately carrying out the operations, it was awarded the contract.

Hosaka Nobuto

But at a price of 100,000 yen, I'm not quite convinced.

So next, I will ask the chief of the Immigration Bureau about this. This company named Accenture, as Vice Minister Kouno has indicated, it is written that it has know-how accumulated from (overseas) experience. What kind of experience does this company have?

Representative for the government Miura [Immigration Bureau Chief]

I will answer this question.

Regarding the company Accenture, related to the system in use at the Immigration Bureau, as a committee member [Mr. Hosaka] just pointed out, Accenture was in charge of investigating reform possibilities for the legacy system. Also, the Optimization Project... (Hosaka cuts in: "That's not what I meant. It is written that the company has overseas experience.")

I'm sorry, I misunderstood the meaning of the question.

I understand that in the U.S., Accenture is setting up a system to collect fingerprints and so on for the US-VISIT program.

Hosaka Nobuto

Mr. Immigration Bureau Chief, I have repeated many times in these ordinary diet sessions that the contract must be awarded in a fair manner. This Optimization Project ― okay? ― for which the report has not yet come out ― Vice Minister Kouno mentioned this a moment ago in answer to my question ― on June 20th of last year, a contract valued at about 100 million yen, 94.92 million yen, was concluded between Accenture and the Optimization Project.

I asked you to comment on the contents of this contract a moment ago, but if you take a look at this [document], here is what it says. It is written that: "The contractor who will execute operation of the authentication system trials and automatic gate system to be used in the Immigration Bureau Access Control Information Systems Division [Nyuukoku kanri no jouhou kanrishitsu/入国管理局の情報管理室] as well in IC passports, etc., will be advised accordingly." In other words, as a result of advice it gave, the advisor became the contractor. What is this supposed to mean? The fact that the contract was awarded at the bidding price of 100,000 yen, doesn't this mean that it was actually included in the 90 million yen deal?

Representative for the government Miura [Immigration Bureau Chief]

I don't quite understand the substance of the question... but basically in this contract Accenture is supposed to investigate what would be the best approach to adopt for the project. The one who is actually going to do the optimization work, and who will take on the job of implementing the system, I assume this would be a different company.

Hosaka Nobuto

I am asking this question to Vice Minister Kouno. What I am saying is that, in the contents that I asked you about earlier, in the contents of Optimization Project from June of last year, it says that the contractor for the automatic gate system, etc. ― Accenture will be doing this, or just assume they will be doing this ― it says that this contractor will be advised appropriately. A contract for this work has been awarded at a price of 100 million yen. And yet, several months later, there is this 100,000 yen contract. What is this about?

Vice Minister Kouno

Because the new system will be extended overseas, and since there are many countries who hope to introduce new systems using the same kind of biometric information for immigration control, within this context, taking on this project in Japan and experimenting with a prototype Japanese system may become, as a business strategy, extremely advantageous for the company. I believe that there are probably many companies who take these kinds of things into account. The reason why I am saying this is that I understand that, although Accenture certainly made the lowest bid, the next lowest bid was also on the order of hundreds of thousands of yen.

In other words, by successfully bidding on the prototype operations and playing a part in the demonstration experiments of the Japanese government, this corporation will earn the trust of the governments of every south-east asian country hoping in the future to do this kind of thing. However many companies there may be who are trying to invest in this way, I don't think it is strange.

Hosaka Nobuto

I am asking the Immigration Bureau Chief. After releasing this report investigating possibilities for reform, Accenture issued an optimization plan to revise the legacy system, and now, for 100,000 yen, it's going to do the automatic gate and biometric information certification experiments. It is steadily advancing its administrative preparations. Did you basically okay this proposal, and decide to switch to this new system? Please answer just this question.

Representative for the government Miura [Immigration Bureau Chief]

On the point you have brought up, we intended to commission the investigation of possibilities for system reform to a third party not directly involved in the development and operations of the existing immigration system. In the case of the transition to the new system, we investigated whether we could count on there being no loss in safety and trustworthiness, whether there would be an enhancement in efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and convenience, as well as whether we could expect a reduction in the total cost.

As an outcome, regarding the operations of the Immigration Bureau, given expected quantitative growth as well as increases in complexity and diversity, in terms of cost-effectiveness and performance, there are problems with maintaining the current system. We are striving to reduce costs by constructing a new open system which is adequately compatible with market principles. At the same time, it is recommended that a system be constructed which embraces the newest biometric information technology built on strategic investment in IT, contributing to the realization of multifaceted policy objectives: strict screening to prevent terrorists and criminals from entering the country, and smooth admission of foreign travellers. This is what was written in the report.

Based on this [report], for the actual implementation, given a completely different perspective, I think a different company would be contracted. The contract is not an extension [of the previous survey]. In regards to the actual biometrics system, it is a separate case.

Hosaka Nobuto

I am asking this question to the Immigration Bureau Chief. A moment ago, I heard from you that Accenture was awarded the contract for 100,000 yen because it has overseas experience. This overseas experience is US-VISIT, an immigration system in the U.S. that was commissioned at a price exceeding one trillion yen. This is what I just heard from you a moment ago.

I would like you to now talk about the similarities and differences between US-VISIT and the version of this system currently being prepared for use in Japan.

Representative for the government Miura [Immigration Bureau Chief]

With regards to the system in this country, we are currently in the middle of Diet proceedings ― we will fix the details once this is finally decided upon ― and for this reason it is difficult to make a comparison on detailed points. I will attempt to answer your question, however, limited to within the realm of what we are currently envisioning.

First I will speak about what may be thought of as similarities between America's US-VISIT program and the system we are envisioning for the future of this country. During landing examination at airports and sea ports, the Immigration Bureau will collect digital information from fingerprints and photographs of foreigners, as well as personal identification information provided. It will store this information as well as crosscheck against data about so-called blacklisted individuals, provided by related institutions, and decide, based on the results, whether to admit the individual. On these points Japan's system is roughly the same as America's US-VISIT system.

On the other hand, with regard to America's US-VISIT system, I understand that not only at the time of landing examination, but also before this step, at the time of so-called visa screening, fingerprint information is collected from applicants, and this is transmitted to the home country to be crosschecked against a blacklist. At the current time, we are not envisioning a scenario of this kind.

Hosaka Nobuto

On the homepage of the American Embassy in Japan and in the investigation of the low-price 100,000 yen bid, it is written that diplomatic efforts are underway to exchange this kind of biometric information. Since these are ongoing and serious problems, I would like to ask you more questions about this.

But as our time is up, I will end here. (April 21, 2006, Lower House Committee on Judicial Affairs)

In the record of proceedings, there are spots where the meaning of certain remarks, which are difficult to understand, are inserted in parentheses. Looking over the conference minutes, in my remarks as well, there are moments where my grammar got a bit sloppy, and other sections where I was using language that was excessively courteous. I have to admit that I am embarrassed about that. Vice minister Kouno Tarou, in replying to my questions, gave an extremely clear and frank reply, whereas the Immigration Bureau Chief was evasive. Kouno explained in his reply that: "The 100,000 yen bid is an investment in earning trust for business development in east asian countries."

Following this question, there was a great uproar in the assembly hall as the "Explanation of the Substance of the Conspiracy Law" [Kyoubouzai no shushisetsumei/共謀罪の趣旨説明] was forced through. Where is our society heading? Through arguing about the immigration system, I have become keenly aware that we have to carefully trace the footsteps of this government striving to become a "digital government". Party leader Fukushima Mizuho also recorded her comments in her diary (May 2).