---

Identity Cards Bill

My Lords—I almost said ““my Lady””, another Freudian slip—it would be possible, if one was moving from one gender to another, to have a card that was originally issued to one in the gender of birth but, as a result of changing gender, to have a second card issued in the gender of designation. Noble Lords will remember the long and complex debates that we had on transsexuals and whether a transsexual was a transsexual if they had not gone through the operation. There are those who will not be able to go through with the operation but will still be entitled to the transgender transference, if I can put it that way. I do not want to revisit those debates. I am sure that noble Lords remember them all too well. The information on the face of the cards will, as I think that I have said on a number of occasions, comply with the International Civil Aviation Organisation’s standard for travel documents, as must the passport. The noble Lord, Lord Selsdon has made that point on a number of occasions. That compliance is what makes it a travel document, as opposed simply to an identity document. The information on the card will resemble what is on the passport. The final specification will be subject to the affirmative resolution procedure, so Parliament will have the final say on what, precisely, goes on the face of the document. As before, however, I assure the House that the address will not be on the face or the chip of the card as, indeed, the address is not on the body of the passport—as noble Lords will know—although you can put information in the back about people to be notified and matters of that sort. I agree with the noble Lord, Lord Selsdon, that the most significant means of identity is the passport. As noble Lords are aware, passports provide the foundation for our identity scheme proposals. Under our proposed scheme, however, the ID cards will be more than a portable form of British passport. The scheme will cover everybody resident in the UK for more than three months—that is the real distinction between the passport and the ID card scheme. It will therefore include foreign nationals and British nationals who do not hold a passport. It is only by having a scheme that applies to everybody that the full benefits will be realised. As is clear from the statutory purposes in Clause 1, ID cards, backed up by the national identity register, will be more than a government travel document for British citizens. Therefore, in so far as Amendment No. 111 represents the extent of the vision of the noble Lord, Lord Selsdon, for an identity card scheme in this country, we do not share it. I understand the thrust of what the noble Lord says about 80 per cent of people having a passport, which is the primary source of identity. We have a database containing all that information that can, with propriety, be accessed in certain specified circumstances. When we add the biometric information to that system, we will, in essence, have many of the features of the proposed identity card scheme. We will not, however, have the safeguards—the commissioner and the ability to audit what happens, checking on the use to which the card is put—or the universality. We will therefore continue with the current position, where those of affluence tend to have a passport and those who are not affluent and do not travel have to find other means of proving their identity—often their MP, doctor, or some other form. They will find it increasingly difficult so to do. The noble Lord, Lord Selsdon, is also right that, in the event of trying to prove one’s identity, it is often requested that one produce one’s passport. Those who do not have one labour under that disadvantage. I can see why the noble Lord says that the passport is the most profound and useful form if identity. It is, but we therefore feel that it is the foundation stone on which the ID card scheme should be built. Subsection (1) of the amendment would codify the position of the passport as a secure and well trusted form of identification document. As I have indicated, the passport is, at present, considered a secure means of proving identity because of the security measures and procedures used in issuing it and the techniques used in its manufacture, which make forgery difficult. Our proposed scheme of identity cards—and, for that matter, the new biometric passports—will be issued with even higher levels of security and certainty. I hear what the noble Baroness, Lady Anelay says: in essence, before the readers come in, people will use the photographic representation to check. As we become familiar with the nature and form taken by identity cards, being able to recognise that easily will also be of great importance. It is that security and certainty and the ability to verify their continuing validity from the register that will make people trust them as the best proofs of identity, not an assertion in legislation that they should be so. We really should lay to rest our fascination with the register. We already have the equivalent of a register for passports. It is a database that holds all information currently held by the Passport Office about the 80 per cent of people in this country who have a passport. We simply do not call it a register.