I am going to shock the noble Baroness Lady Henig, by opposing the amendment. I do so with deference because the noble Earl, Lord Northesk, yields to no person in this House in his technical understanding of the impenetrabilities of this whole subject. But I am bound to say, as a simple lawyer, that ““convenient”” cannot mean convenient for the state; it must mean convenient to the individuals referred to in the subsection. I might have backed the noble Earl had he suggested an alternative word, but as he has not I rather agree with a previous speaker that it is better to have ““convenient”” than nothing at all because convenience to the citizen is something to be approved of.
Identity Cards Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Phillips of Sudbury
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 15 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 c1053 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 10:40:26 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_279846
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_279846
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_279846