Identity Cards Bill

I could say lots but I will confine my contribution to a few remarks. The amendment so ably and forcefully moved by the noble Lord, Lord Thomas of Gresford, changes the name of the register of individuals set up by this clause to the national surveillance register. By doing that he has simply set out many of the fears expressed about the scheme; namely, the Big Brother element. The thread of debate, evidenced at Second Reading and during the Bill’s progress in the other place, follows concerns expressed by the Information Commissioner that the Government, without ever explaining what they are doing, are building a surveillance society. Why is it necessary to build up the audit trails of use of the ID card? How will the system operate? Does it not amount to passive surveillance and build a tool with which a later government could construct active surveillance? We believe that it is essential to explore the opportunity to draw a clear line between the principles of biometric passports and border controls, which may have merit and deserve separate debate themselves, and the issue of compulsory or near-compulsory registration and the requirement to buy an identity card. I hope that the Minister will be fully clear in his reply about the intended scope of designation and the rollout, and about the intended operation and development of audit trails in future, thus enabling us and others to scrutinise the proposals seriously. I await his reply with great interest.