Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Phillips of Sudbury (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Monday, 16 January 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Identity Cards Bill.


Identity Cards Bill

My Lords, I am grateful to the noble Lord for what he has said. Indeed, he made the point about the Data Protection Act last time. I tabled the amendment because this is a very particular Bill. It is about putting together a national central database; it is not about something wholly unrelated to data protection. Nothing could be more central to the Bill than the need to protect the data which find their way on to the register. The noble Lord more or less accepted that. It therefore seems bizarre to rely, by implication, on the provisions of another piece of legislation. There are nearly 42 pages in the Bill, and for us not to have, upfront, in Clause 1, a duty—part of the statutory purpose—to have secure storage and recording seems wrong and against common sense. On that basis, I should like to test the opinion of the House. On Question, Whether the said amendment (No. 4) shall be agreed to? Their Lordships divided: Contents, 206; Not-Contents, 144.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
677 c469 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Access Disclosure of information Data protection Biometrics Age Costs Fraud Fees and charges ICT Identity cards Investment Interviews Police Personation Procurement National identity register Proof of identity Passports Registration Young people Security
Legislation
Identity Cards Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk