Identity Cards Bill

Much of our debate on the previous amendment refers directly to this one. I know the noble Lord does not expect me to repeat that debate. We do not believe it would be right to limit the use of the scheme in this way; the public would find it very odd indeed. The noble Lord rightly said that the threshold is set high. The reason for this is that we thought it was important to give the police and authorities access to the audit log, which would demonstrate how often and how an identity card had been used. It was proper to make sure that use was restricted to the most serious crimes in the way that we defined them. But, as I said earlier, crime of a lower level can often have a pernicious and, at least, a deleterious effect on wide swathes of the public. It must be right that the police, in the proper exercise of their duty, should be able to check identity with the register in a way that makes it easier for them to protect members of the public and to do their duty. To do otherwise would put an unnecessary impediment in their way. I know that that is not what the noble Lord intends, and that he has concerns but I remind him—particularly in relation to the changes made in the way in which we charge and the involvement of the CPS in the whole prosecution system—that we now have some extra safeguards and a really robust system to deal with these matters. We think it is proper to allow the police to exercise their duty and to have the benefit of information which the register can procure.