---

Identity Cards Bill

My Lords, in that case, I am sure that when it comes to read Hansard with attention and enthusiasm—as it undoubtedly will—the whole House will find that reply disappointing. The Minister suggested that I was confused between what would have been the situation under the proposed EU constitution, had it been adopted—to which the Government have signed-up but have not brought into law—and the current arrangements. I should tell the noble Baroness that I am not confused about that. I am much clearer about the position of the constitution than I am about the detail of this amendment. I have based my remarks on the current arrangement, as I said on the previous occasion, which is the TEC as amended by various treaties, ending with the Treaty of Nice. Nor was I saying to the Minister that I was worried only about what would happen if the Government decided in future to opt in to a measure which could give rise to us being dragged into an EU identity card system. I am saying that, but my own position is that I think we have already gone too far, especially if the Luxembourg court eventually supports Brussels in the adoption of an EU card system—which, of course, it will. Brussels has never taken a decision which reverses the ratchet to which the noble Lord, Lord Stoddart, referred. It would be helpful if we were all to study the detail of what has been said. I think it possible that I will have to come back with the amendment at Third Reading. In the mean time, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. Clause 41 [Orders and regulations]: