Identity Cards Bill

We have had a very interesting debate lasting one hour and 20 minutes. I shall turn my attention primarily to the amendment and shall seek to answer many of the questions raised. We have the advantage of having at least three days in Committee—the noble Baroness, Lady Anelay, tells me that it is five, so there will be even greater pleasure for us. It would be helpful if we could approach these issues item by item and seek to debate each difficult and knotty problem as it arises in its place. I am aware that a number of issues which will come up in debate on later amendments have been conflated within this, the first, amendment. I shall try to answer the issues which seem to me to spring primarily from Amendment No. 1 and, if the Committee will permit me, I shall touch lightly on the issues which we shall have the delight of exploring more fully later. Before I start, perhaps I may put to rest a few myths. The first—I hope that this will reassure my noble friend Lady Kennedy of The Shaws—is that the subject of DNA will be raised in a later amendment but it does not appear in this Bill. It is not included in Schedule 1 to the Bill and there are no powers in the Bill to take DNA samples. I hear my noble friend Lord Campbell-Savours saying ““unfortunately”” but I want to lay that to rest now. The Government have decided to put limits on the Bill. Secondly—again in response to my noble friend Lady Kennedy of The Shaws—I can say that there are no general powers for the police to stop and search people for an unspecified reason and demand that they provide proof of ID. That is not contained in this Bill and the situation will not change following the introduction of ID cards.