Identity Cards Bill

I speak in support of those amendments to which we have put our names. They are intended to close down the wide definition of ““registrable””—I always find difficulty with that word—facts specified by subsections (5), (7) and (8). By confining the meaning of registrable facts to that specified in Schedule 1, they create a finite list of information that must be provided for the register. It is vital that a clearly defined limit on what information is to be included in the register and the powers of the Home Secretary to alter those requirements is set down at the start of this misconceived and unpredictable venture toward the proposed scheme. The amendments take into account the remarks made by the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee at paragraph 8 of its 5th report. It drew the attention of this House to the fact that the power in Clause 3(5) was not confined to information needed to prove identity and extended to other matters, such as previous addresses and terms of residence in different parts of the UK. Therefore, it is still up to the Committee to consider whether the content of the power and its extent is acceptable. I support this attempt to confine the list of the information to be registered to matters related only to identity. The amendments are not just a clearer way to show what may be included in the register in the Bill; they also remove the information under Clause 1(5)(c), covering previous addresses, and under Clause 1(5)(f), covering previous residential status. They therefore make a substantive difference to the power of the Home Secretary to demand that such information be registered. Will the Minister please explain why such information is required under the Bill?