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

moved, as an amendment to Amendment No. 77, Amendment No. 78:"Line 2, after ““arrangements”” insert ““and uses””" The noble Lord said: My Lords, I should like first to thank the Government for Amendment No. 77, which is important and covers a great deal—indeed, the central parts—of my concern in Committee. It makes the role of the commissioner much clearer, much firmer and much better. Of the five amendments in my name, Amendments Nos. 78 to 82, the one which seems to have, dare I say, particular merit is Amendment No. 78. I am not quite clear why the Minister rejected it. Clause 24(2) sets out four areas where,"““the function of the Commissioner””" is"““to keep under review””." Paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) start by referring to ““the arrangements”” for this or that. Paragraph (d) does not start with ““the arrangements”” for anything, but says:"““the uses to which ID cards are being put””." For the life of me, I cannot therefore understand why the addition of the words ““and uses”” to the sentence,"““Where the commissioner reviews any arrangements””," at the start of government Amendment No. 77, would not be helpful and clarificatory. If Amendment No. 77 is left as it starts, it would appear that its purview is only in respect of the first three paragraphs—those which deal with arrangements—and not the fourth, which deals with uses. I would be grateful if the Minister could review what she said on that. I will certainly do so. I accept that Amendments Nos. 79 to 82 are inessential amendments, but I thought that they were improving ones. It struck me that to talk of reviewing the effectiveness with which arrangements are undertaken is better than reviewing,"““the extent to which the arrangements make appropriate provision””." For a start, it is shorter. I also think that, in this context, ““effectiveness”” is a more effective term than talking about,"““the extent to which the arrangements make appropriate provision””." However, I am not going to go to the stake on that or the other amendments which are pursuant to it. I beg to move.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
678 c45-6 
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