---

Identity Cards Bill

My Lords, I may or may not be able to give the noble Lord an answer to his last question; studying the clause I may pray in aid that I might have to drop him a note, but we shall see. Amendment No. 116A would insert into the general interpretation of the Bill a definition of consent in relation to Clause 14. That would have the effect that all consent must be written and that consent can be singular—on one occasion only—or continuing. Continuing consent may be cancelled, which would also have to be carried out in writing. It is our intention that, if not all, the majority of checks under Clause 14 should be carried out on a singular basis—that is, consent is given for a check on any one occasion. We do not wish that consent to have to be expressed in writing, as that would be bureaucratic and, in our view, cumbersome. I know that the noble Lord, Lord Phillips of Sudbury, is against things that are cumbersome, and he certainly does not like much about bureaucracy. The provision could have the effect of forcing a person to fill in a form every time—more paper—rather than simply handing over his or her card and asking or agreeing that it be checked. On continuing consent I thank the noble Lord for raising an interesting point. On the one hand there might be dangers in allowing for continuing consent, but one could argue on the other hand that there would be benefits to cardholders, because it would be easier. I have the view that perhaps checking occasionally is a good thing and that continuing consent runs against that. It is a difficult point on balance. As the noble Lord has raised the matter when he has, we are content to give it some further thought, although I am not going to promise anything. The noble Lord asked about authority and consent. A response has been provided and I shall endeavour to enlighten him. I accept that there may be some overlap between authority and consent, but authority is more to cover a person acting on behalf of an individual; for example, a relative or someone with power of attorney. Consent is more for an application made by a third party with the agreement of the individual concerned. Those are the two different instances in which the terminology as it is explained to me has been set out in the Bill. No doubt the noble Lord will want to read that explanation carefully and I think I will too.