Proceeding contribution from Baroness Seccombe (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Monday, 23 January 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Identity Cards Bill 2005-06.
Identity Cards Bill
moved Amendment No. 52B:"Page 7, line 21, leave out from ““that”” to end of line 22 and insert ““the individual has consented should be recorded””" The noble Baroness said: My Lords, in moving Amendment No. 52B, I shall also speak to the consequential amendment, Amendment No. 52E. The aim of the amendments is to break the link between ID cards and the register. The first amends subsection (2)(a) so that the card will record registrable facts about the individual that he has consented should be recorded, rather than facts that are already part of the entry on the register. Meanwhile, the second amendment is a consequential one to subsection (3)(a), to remove the words, ““only the prescribed information”” and insert,"““such of the prescribed information as the individual has consented to be recorded””." We have already highlighted that it should be the individual’s personal choice to decide whether to sign up to the register when applying for a new passport or other designated documents. That naturally follows on from the debate. The wording, as it stands in subsection (1)(a), broadly suggests that all registrable facts that are already recorded as part of an individual’s entry in the register could be transferred to the ID card itself. Surely the individual should be able to choose which of the necessary registrable facts are recorded on his card, rather than automatically having all those that are recorded on the register transferred. The example that springs to mind is that of addresses. For identification purposes you only have to prove your main abode—usually achieved by taking along a utility bill or a driving licence. As the Minister explained during debates on Clause 1, the Government have made provision, by Amendment No.7, for the address of every other place in the UK or anywhere else he has a place of residence to be registered, covering holiday homes as well as foreign students’ accommodation. We welcomed that move, but it means that there may be more than one current address on the register. Surely the individual should be able to choose which one—if there are two in the UK—should be shown on his card, rather than having the potential for both to be shown. Similarly, should it not be the individual’s choice about which telephone number or e-mail address he wants on the card? Although I have not checked, it occurs to me that the separation of the register and the information recorded on the card could be another method by which the individual’s data rights can be protected to some degree. Will the Minister clarify exactly which registrable facts will be transferred to the ID card? Will it be the same for each individual? Who will decide which ones are transferred for each individual? I beg to move.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 677 c999
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Data protection Biometrics Crime prevention Death Costs Delegated legislation Fees and charges Identity cards Information Documents Personal records Proof of identity Passports Registration Security Driving licences
- Legislation
- Identity Cards Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-01-26 17:00:43 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_293577
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_293577
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_293577