My noble friend has made an important point. The purpose of this Bill, although it is not well stated, is to ensure that we do not have a number of people who are not British able to come here and wander about and pretend to be British. If we were to make the provisions of Clause 2 more specific, that purpose could be achieved. I think it is much too vague in Clause 2(1) merely to refer to,:"““every individual who—""““(a) is entitled to be entered in it; and""““(b) applies to be entered in it””."
That could cover a very wide field of people. In the interests of the people of the United Kingdom, and of those who genuinely have a reason to be here, and are acceptable here, we must make the provisions of Clause 2 much more specific. As a start, ““individual”” in the first line of subsection (1) should be replaced with ““UK citizen””.
I am not going to comment on Amendment No. 47—although I must say I was impressed with what my noble friend had to say—because it covers a very wide field and needs to be carefully considered. It would be interesting to know what the Government have to say about it. Amendment No. 46, however, seems to me to be vital.
Identity Cards Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Renton
(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 c1672 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 10:34:45 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_279356
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_279356
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_279356