This is not of course information that may be recorded in the register under Schedule 1. Presumably the Government, reasonably, want proof that someone is dead for the purposes of the register. The point has been reasonably made that while it may be possible to produce proof of death, the date of death is very much more difficult. One has only to consider the case of members of our armed services who are now at risk in many parts of the world. We may not know when and where they were killed, if that tragedy has occurred. If they have been fighting in the remoter parts of Afghanistan, a body may be found but we may not know the time of death. Similarly, if there is an earthquake of the kind that has recently occurred in the northern Indian subcontinent, we shall not know the time of death. Surely all that is required for the purposes of the Bill is proof of death, in order not to have the kind of register described by my noble friend Lord Northesk, which is one with an infinite capacity for perpetual growth. Perhaps the amendment that we have is not the right one to provide a solution; what we want is proof, not the date.
Identity Cards Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Crickhowell
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 23 November 2005.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Identity Cards Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
675 c1646 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 10:17:57 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_279271
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_279271
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_279271