Proceeding contribution from Lord Phillips of Sudbury (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 14 December 2005. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Identity Cards Bill.
Identity Cards Bill
I am grateful for those comments. As the noble Baroness was speaking I reflected whether, as regards the example she gave of a British citizen being accused of doing something abroad on a day he was in this country, the information in this country could be used to rebut the accusation. Would not that be paragraph 9 information, which is specifically excluded from the purview of Clause 20(2)? The information regarding someone being here on 20 December rather than in Calais is likely to be paragraph 9 information, which comprises an audit trail of the person’s use of the card. I do not see how else it would be provided.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 676 c1338
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Disclosure of information Biometrics Crime prevention Costs British nationality Fraud Fees and charges Identity cards Information Proof of identity Passports Registration Research Revenue and Customs
- Legislation
- Identity Cards Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 14:06:00 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_286975
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_286975
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_286975