Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Martin Linton (Labour) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 29 March 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Identity Cards Bill.


Identity Cards Bill

I am sorry, but we must all heed Madam Deputy Speaker’s words of warning and we need to make our points in the short time that is available. Lord Armstrong of Ilminster is moving towards that sort of voluntary scheme, and I could happily live with that. Even Lord Phillips said that his amendment"““would have meant that the citizen had an option—effectively, for five years—on whether he or she wished to have an ID card.””—[Official Report, House of Lords, 28 March 2006; Vol. 680, c. 645.]" If he means by that that one would be on the ID register but could choose whether to have an ID card, he should support the solution that is beginning to emerge. It is the ID register that is important, not the actual possession of a card. When my passport runs out and I have to renew it, I cannot see that it will make much difference if an ID card is thrown in as well. I shall be happy because it provides an additional form of identity. The point was made in the last debate—it is central to the issue of voluntary and compulsory—that the information one gives to the Passport and Records Agency to renew one’s passport is exactly the same as that required to go on the ID register. It consists of name, address, date and place of birth and nationality or immigration status—


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
444 c887 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Databases Biometrics Identity cards Documents National identity register Proof of identity Passports Registration
Legislation
Identity Cards Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk