---

Identity Cards Bill

My Lords, I want to make one general point and ask one specific question. I am grateful to the noble Baroness for her elaboration today of the explanation that she gave in Committee on 16 November and for the improvements that she has introduced in these amendments. Like the noble Lord, Lord Phillips, I am not entirely happy that we do not have a time limit of six years or some period because, even with the limited usage that the noble Baroness has described, I think that it will be difficult for people always to produce evidence of where they have lived, even without dates, for periods of more than six years. That will particularly be the case if they are asked to reinforce the story that they have told in order to provide what the noble Baroness described on a previous occasion as the ““gold standard””. I can see that some people living abroad might find it quite difficult to give satisfactory evidence or even to be certain themselves that they were being accurate, and they could then find their whole position prejudiced when in fact they were utterly honest and straightforward. So I am concerned and I am not entirely sure that we have the right answer. My specific question comes from rereading the Official Report of the debate on 16 November. The noble Baroness is quoted as saying:"““We will prescribe the period for which we will ask for information on previous addresses as provided at paragraph 1(h) of Schedule 1””.—[Official Report, 16/11/05; col. 1167.]" But there is no paragraph 1(h) of Schedule 1. I am not sure how this has arisen and to what the noble Baroness is referring. As she said a few moments ago, the regulations will come under Clause 12, and presumably any details that she sets out will come in those regulations. So I am not sure how paragraph 1(h) of Schedule 1, existing or not, has crept into the whole matter, and I should be grateful for clarification.