---

Identity Cards Bill

I am perturbed by this Government’s proposal that we should adopt a ““Shoot first and ask questions afterwards”” approach to penalties. It is not civilised, and it will not be a comfortable kind of country in which to live if that becomes the general practice. It has always been the practice in this country to have penalties that start low and escalate, even in cases such as non-payment of taxes where the citizen is not suffering any inconvenience by non-compliance. You are faced with a £100 fine for being late, and it gets more serious if you continue in default. That seems to be the ordinary and civilised way of doing things. Having read the code of practice that has so generously been provided, it is clear that the intention is to impose the maximum fine—I have read it and if that was not the intention it should not have been written in that way—and on later application possibly to allow mitigation. That is putting the frighteners on. It is a seriously unpleasant way to proceed, and it is destructive of civil society. I also do not really understand the noble Baroness’s objection to criminalising things like this. I suspect that most of us in this House are criminals because we have had road traffic contraventions at some time in our lives. One disregards those as nothing in particular; you pay the fine, you go on your way and you accept the penalties. I have not noticed that it has ever been any serious disadvantage to my life that I have one of those to my discredit. I do not think that a penalty under this Act would be regarded any more seriously than that.