Identity Cards Bill

This is a debate that we have on a lot of legislation, is it not? On very many occasions I have heard the noble Lord make the argument for having something on the face of the Bill because it is terribly important, and sometimes he has a point. However, we are talking here of the detail of the operation of an appointments system. I think that those matters are best dealt with in guidance and so on. We want certainty in the wording. The noble Lord has heard me describe in reasonable terms, I am sure, how we see this scheme working. Yes, we will be providing people with a multiple choice of appointment times. Yes, it will be in a prescribed place because there will be enrolment centres in prescribed places. But they will be able to exercise choice in relation to enrolment centre. I think that the noble Lord is getting it. We are intending this legislation to work in a flexible and user-friendly way. That is our intention. There is no point designing a system of identity cards which, as the noble Lord, Lord Thomas, said, would cause people to rise up in revolt. That is not our intention. It is certainly not how we see things working. The noble Lord clearly has objections to the language being used. However, the sorts of things that we are talking about here and the degree of detail raised by some noble Lords are best dealt with in regulations. I am looking at the Conservative Benches in particular and thinking that many Members of the Committee have experience of government and will have run many times through arguments about the value of good, sound framework legislation and the need to leave to guidance the detail and the important elaboration of how the scheme will work in practice.