---

Identity Cards Bill

My Lords, the amendment would remove the provision that ID cards such as passports remain the property of the issuer, which will normally be the Secretary of State. It would replace it with a statement that the card was the property of the person to whom it was issued. Our view is clear. It would be completely unprecedented for a document of this nature to be issued in those terms. A good analogy is a passport, which is endorsed:"““This passport remains the property of Her Majesty’s Government in the United Kingdom and may be withdrawn at any time””. " If the cards were to be the property of the user, that would seriously undermine confidence in the reliability of the scheme both in this country and in the rest of the European Union. It would also contravene standard practice across the world for travel documents. The issuing of ID cards and the maintenance of the integrity of the system as a whole is the responsibility of the Secretary of State, so it is entirely appropriate that the cards remain the property of the Government. The noble Baroness said that she felt that the cards being the property of the persons to whom they were issued would be a check on potential criminality. We could argue the contrary. If they were to be the property of the person to whom they were issued, it would be very difficult to have its sale or transfer to another person blocked. The product would be that much more easily transferable and knowledge of it and what was on it would be that much more difficult to obtain. So, for safety and security reasons—if for no other—it would be much wiser for it to remain the property of the government of the United Kingdom, as is the case with passports.