Identity Cards Bill

moved Amendment No. 1:"Page 1, line 3, after ““State”” insert ““to review annually—" (a)   whether the costs and measures needed to establish an identity card scheme are proportionate to the benefits such a system would bring; (b)   whether his department, or any agency or person instructed by him, has the technical capacity to devise and deliver an identity card scheme that meets the criteria of being— (i)   fully secure; (ii)   fully accurate; (iii)   fully reliable; (iv)   affordable in the light of other charges to public funds; (v)   sustainable in the light of anticipated technological developments; and (c)   whether, if in his view it meets the criteria set out in paragraph (b), it is the most effective means of achieving the purpose set out in subsection (4), and, having conducted that review, to lay an annual report before Parliament, explaining the reasons for his conclusions, before incurring any additional public expenditure or issuing any new order under this Act. (1A)   The Secretary of State must have regard at all times to any resolution of, or any consideration by, each House of Parliament in relation to his report under subsection (1). (1B)   Having regard to subsections (1) and (1A), it shall be the responsibility of the Secretary of State”” The noble Baroness said: In moving Amendment No. 1, I shall speak also to Amendments Nos. 10 and 12. At last, we have the opportunity—our first in this House—to debate in detail the Bill which adjusts the fundamental relationship between the individual and the state. The bedrock of this Government’s plans for ID cards is the construction and maintenance of the National Identity Register. So we have tabled amendments to give the Government the opportunity to answer a diverse number of questions about the operation of that register. Examples of the issues raised are as follows. Who should be given the opportunity and duty to maintain the register? Why have the Government chosen this particular model of ID card? What will the purposes of the register be and what will the Government’s priorities be in determining them? How will individual citizens be able easily and freely to verify the information held on them? How will the Government ensure the security of information on the register? In addition, of course, they will need to justify the inclusion of certain data on the register, and we will need to question the manner in which the register is maintained. I have listed but a few of the issues raised in Clause 1 before we have the delight of going on to later clauses. I outline those issues because I appreciate that Members of the Committee will have seen that a large number of amendments has been tabled. Throughout, instead of just seeking to leave out a particular subsection, I have tried to write in what I am challenging the Government to explain. I appreciate that if I did not do so it would be particularly difficult for those who work so hard on the Back Benches to work out what on earth I am trying to get at. Of course, the Minister has the advantage of professional civil servants behind her, who can plot my every move and thought. I now turn to the issue in my first group of amendments. These are probing amendments, and I say that to reassure the noble Baroness’s friends on the Benches behind her. They are probing not least because, as I speak, the Home Secretary is addressing a meeting of Conservative Peers within the House to explain to them his proposals on the Terrorism Bill. In those circumstances, I feel that it would be most inappropriate to table anything other than a series of probing amendments.