Proceeding contribution from Baroness Anelay of St Johns (Conservative) 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, I support my noble friend’s important amendment, which gives practical clarity to the provisions governing the disclosure of information. He has done so against a background of reminding us of some of the concerns that there are currently in this country about the way in which information may or may not be disclosed. Where it is right for information to be disclosed, we are all concerned to ensure that, for example, children in vulnerable situations are protected. But there is some confusion on these matters. I am grateful to the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of St Albans for asking the question that he did. I know it gently drifted away from the amendment but I hope the Minister will be able to respond to it. I listened to the same radio broadcast as the right reverend Prelate and it struck me then that the Home Secretary was taking a rather different stance from that which is being presented to us here. In front of us we have a Bill which is intended to link from the word go the passport to ID—initially compulsorily—when you apply for a new document. I tabled amendments at the Committee stage which probed the issue of how soon the driving licence would come in as the designated document. But this is the first time that the Home Secretary has mentioned in one breath the passport and in the next breath the Criminal Records Bureau, forgetting all the rest. That is a cause for concern and I understand exactly why the right reverend Prelate mentioned that against the background of the importance of volunteering. So, although he was drifting away from the amendment, it was an important point to make. My noble friend has argued his case with devastating logic and it would not be right for me to go over the arguments again in detail. As my noble friend said, it is important to have something which acts as a belt and braces for the Human Rights Act and the Data Protection Act and gives the National Identity Scheme Commissioner and the Information Commissioner sharper teeth. The amendment does so in a very sensible way.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 678 c30-1
- 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
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-06-10 14:36:21 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_295831
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_295831
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_295831