---

Identity Cards Bill

moved Amendment No. 7:"Page 15, line 40, at end insert—" ““(A1)   It shall be unlawful to make it a condition of doing anything in relation to an individual that the individual— (a)   makes an application under section 12(1) for the provision to him of information recorded in his entry in the Register; (b)   exercises the right conferred by section 7 of the Data Protection Act 1998 (c. 29) to obtain information recorded in his entry in the Register; or (c)   provides a person with information about what is recorded in his entry in the Register.”” The noble Lord said: My Lords, noble Lords may recall that at Report we indicated that we were investigating whether there was a need to widen the safeguard in Clause 16 in order to close a potential loophole. After giving the matter careful thought we concluded that there was such a need. Government Amendments Nos. 7, 8, 9 and 10 are designed to address that need. Noble Lords who have followed the matter closely will recall that Clause 16—Clause 18 as it was previously—is a key safeguard in the Bill. It prohibits organisations from making things conditional on the production of an ID card or a check on the register save in certain circumstances. In essence, the clause prevents compulsion by the back door. As drafted, the prohibition relates to a requirement that an ID card be produced, and a requirement that an application under Clause 12 be made or consented to in order that information from the register be provided to the organisation concerned. Government Amendment No. 7 adds three further prohibited scenarios. They are as follows: requiring a person to undertake a subject access request under Section 7 of the Data Protection Act; requiring a person to make an application under Clause 12 for information to be provided to him, the cardholder, from his entry on the register—that scenario is distinct from what is already provided for in Clause 16(1)(a) because the information would be being provided to the cardholder not directly to the organisation concerned; and requiring a person to provide information about what is recorded in his entry on the register. This scenario is something of a catch-all. It would cover, for example, forcing people to produce printouts of their entries on the register obtained using the secure online facility. It should be noted that these three scenarios are absolutely prohibited. Unlike the scenarios set out in Clause 16(1), these prohibitions do not fall away in the circumstances set out in subsection (2); that is, where the cardholder is subject to compulsory registration; where alternative methods of establishing identity are allowed for; or where the requirement relates to the provision of a public service and has been imposed by legislation. The absolute nature of the new prohibitions is particularly important in respect of accreditation. As noble Lords will be aware, we have amended the Bill so that information may not be provided to a person under Clause 12 unless he is accredited with the Secretary of State. Government Amendment No. 7 ensures that an organisation cannot avoid accreditation by requiring the cardholder to have the information provided to himself and then pass it on to the organisation. Government Amendments Nos. 8, 9 and 10 are all consequential on government Amendment No. 7. I hope that noble Lords recognise that these amendments represent an important and necessary tightening up of the crucial safeguard in Clause 16. I beg to move.