Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Phillips of Sudbury (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Monday, 30 January 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Identity Cards Bill 2005-06.


Identity Cards Bill

My Lords, before the noble Baroness sits down, I thank her for her explanation of all these matters; they are scarcely simple. However, the language of Clause 15 is different from the policy that the Minister enunciated. She was clear about the policy, and I accept what she said. The problem is that the wording of Clause 15(2) does not follow the policy; it is wider. If one supposes different circumstances, a different Minister and a different government, then one does not have the reassurance that the Minister gave to the House. The classic case of a prescription for which a member of the public has to pay something would not fall within the exemption in Clause 15(2). Will the Minister think again about this before Third Reading, because it is an important point? It is not good law to include in a Bill a provision that is dependent on policy. Will the Minister come back with some wording that takes account of my point?


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
678 c14-5 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Complaints Disability Disclosure of information Data protection Databases Codes of practice CCTV Biometrics Costs ICT Genetics EU law Identity cards European communities Internet Ethnic groups Personal records Public appointments Photographs Nationality National identity register Proof of identity Passports Prescriptions Registration Surveillance Hacking Office of the Identity Commissioner Driving licences Transgender people
Legislation
Identity Cards Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk