Identity Cards Bill

moved Amendment No. 112:"Page 5, line 20, leave out ““, and other biometric information about himself,””" The noble Baroness said: Amendment No. 112 picks up the theme of exploring the relationship between Schedule 1 and the rest of the Bill. It asks the very straightforward question of what other biometric information may be added in future to the Government’s expressed requirement that fingerprints, iris scans and face scans should be registered. Earlier today, the noble Lord, Lord Phillips of Sudbury, addressed a slightly different point when he probed whether an iris scan was an internal or external characteristic.  My question is different, because it asks what the Government have in mind as other biometric data. The difficulty is that if the Government are not able to give the Committee information on this now, we suspect that their calculations on costs will become even more haphazard because any change to the collection of biometric data will have an impact on their collection and storage, and there will be an impact on the operation of the readers that will be used by other departments, such as the NHS and the DWP, to check whether people are entitled to the health services or benefits that they claim. I beg to move.