Identity Cards Bill

I certainly understand that. I will be as brief as I can, because I took time opening the debate when I made it clear that it was a vital amendment, but one on which I would have to reflect properly on the Minister’s answer. That is because this is the first occasion on which the Government have had the opportunity to put before the House their response to three new reports that were not considered in another place: those of the Joint Committee on Human Rights, the Select Committee on the Constitution, and the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee. It would have been wrong both in principle and practice had I sought to resolve the matter this evening either way. The noble Baroness prays in aid the report of the Delegated Powers Committee. I remind her that, although I agree with much of its report, I disagree with it when it states that the Bill provides for a compulsory scheme preceded by a voluntary stage. I argue that it is not a voluntary stage and therefore come to a slightly different conclusion, not in the Government’s favour, from that of the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee. The noble Baroness says that my amendments would deny the Government the opportunity to go ahead with a compulsory scheme. I am certainly not trying to do that; I am trying to give them the opportunity to do so by primary legislation after full and proper consideration. I am very grateful to the noble Baroness for her response on what Mr Burnham said in another place about the operation of the super-affirmative SI. She was as clear as she could have been in ensuring that this House would be able, under the order-making procedure, to have a full and final say if we diverged from another place. That was a most helpful advance. We must all look carefully at the matter and will probably remain of a differing view about whether primary legislation is required. However, I must end by reminding the noble Baroness gently that, although she continually refers to the clear, considerable and consistent public support for identity cards, public support can waver when the public find out what is really involved. I remind her that ICM research carried out between 18 and 20 November this year discovered that the drop in support for ID cards was to 50 per cent and that opposition to the proposal had risen to 48 per cent. So public opinion is a changing thing. We will have to see how that opinion changes reflecting on the debates in this House. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. [Amendments Nos. 118 to 120 not moved.]