Proceeding contribution from Lord Phillips of Sudbury (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 23 November 2005. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Identity Cards Bill.

Identity Cards Bill

This amendment seems to be a bit of a curate’s egg. As long as the Bill retains the voluntary system, it seems to me to be unnecessary. I can see the point made by the noble Baroness, Lady Corston, and the noble Lord, Lord Gould, that there are particular groups of people who particularly want identity cards for particular reasons. I am absolutely happy with that and do not begin to deny it. I do not see why, if some old fogey of 90—I shall withdraw ““old fogey””—wants an identity card, he should not have it. If this system becomes compulsory by primary legislation, I would see the force of the noble Baroness’s amendment.

Secondary information

Type: Proceeding contribution
Reference: 675 c1685-6
Session: 2005-06
Chamber / Committee: House of Lords chamber
Subjects: Disclosure of information Data protection Criminal records Biometrics Death Age Fraud Fingerprints ICT Eligibility Immigration controls Genetics Identity cards Gender Personal records Personation National identity register Proof of identity Passports Registration Registration of births, deaths, marriages and civil partnerships Personal names
Legislation: Identity Cards Bill 2005-06
Link: View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk

Identity Cards Bill

Secondary information

Librarians' tools