Proceeding contribution from Baroness Anelay of St Johns (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
My Lords, I thank the noble Lord, Lord Bassam of Brighton, for his courteous response. He has not actually given me reassurance overall, but certainly reassurance enough to withdraw the amendment. I think it has proved to me two things. The first is the importance of tackling this issue from another angle—that is, looking at the audit trail. The noble Lord; Lord Phillips of Sudbury, tabled an amendment on our first day in Committee with regard to the paragraph 9 of the schedule. I want to look at that again as an important way of tackling this. Secondly, the Minister was far too courteous to point out that my amendment did not achieve what I was trying to achieve anyway. He gave me the answer that I needed, even if I did not like it and even though I had tabled the wrong amendment. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. [Amendments Nos. 64B to 64D not moved.] Clause 16 [Procedure for regulations under s. 15]:
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 677 c1054-5
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Disclosure of information Costs Fees and charges Identity cards Information Documents Personal records Public service Proof of identity Registration Security
- Legislation
- Identity Cards Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-01-26 18:04:13 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_293671
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_293671
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_293671