---

Identity Cards Bill

My Lords, I was asking myself why I liked the noble Lord, Lord Phillips. I have concluded that it is because he is good at judging government Ministers on their real intent. I was pleased when he said that he trusted us on this issue. What I like about the debates that we sometimes have in your Lordships’ House is that at least the noble Lord starts from that position. That helps us to find our way through some of these complicated and difficult issues. Amendment No. 11 would mean that only external physical characteristics that are capable of being used to identify an individual would be registrable facts and could be recorded, therefore, on the register. The noble Lord, Lord Phillips, rehearsed that matter. In Committee, my noble friend Lady Scotland explained that it is intended that only external physical characteristics would be recorded on the register. The definition of biometric information under Clause 43(1) was drafted with that in mind and would prevent the recording of DNA, for example. I believe that that is commonly accepted. I understand the arguments about DNA. Although the noble Lord, Lord Thomas of Gresford, may be predisposed to be more sceptical about our longer-term intention, the introduction of DNA into this form of data collection field would be a very profound step indeed. I have no doubt that such a proposition would have to be very carefully thought through and would be the subject not just of secondary legislation but of primary legislation if, at some point in the future, a future government thought that it was desirable. I think that we are a very long way from that point. Nevertheless, it is right to raise it as part of the wide parameters of a debate about identification. I want to make it clear that we appreciate very much the concerns raised by the noble Lord, Lord Phillips, during this debate and earlier debates about internal physical characteristics that may not be biometrics although we are not necessarily convinced that all the characteristics to which the noble Lord referred would be capable of identifying an individual for the purposes of the identity card scheme. That said, as the noble Lord said, the principle underlying the amendment is very much in line with our intentions. Our intentions are the same. We are happy to consult further with parliamentary counsel and both opposition Benches and to return at Third Reading with an appropriate amendment which addresses the issue at the core of the noble Lord’s argument. The noble Baroness, Lady Carnegy of Lour, was right that we should accept the political advice that we have been given from opposition Peers on this issue. With that thought in mind, and with the spirit underlying the intention of the amendment, we are happy to try to return at Third Reading with an amendment which satisfies our shared intentions.