Proceeding contribution from Charles Clarke (Labour) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 16 March 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Identity Cards Bill.
Identity Cards Bill
In a moment. My fourth point is that the Lords amendments would impose an additional burden and cost on the plans for the introduction of ID cards that were approved by this House. It cannot be right for the constituents whom we represent to be denied by those whom they did not elect and cannot remove the most cost-effective option in implementing a scheme. In effect, the Lords voted for the establishment of two parallel biometric databases, with all the cost, inconvenience, confusion and insecurity that that approach involves. That raises the question of whether the unelected House has the right directly to place such burdens on our constituents. The remaining issue is, essentially, a constitutional one: whether it is right for the other place to keep insisting on amendments that have been rejected here twice already, and that will be rejected again today.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 443 c1646
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Applications Legislative process Identity cards Documents National identity register Passports Registration Salisbury convention
- Legislation
- Identity Cards Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2026-05-13 12:04:42 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_309237
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_309237
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_309237