moved Amendment No. 121:"Page 5, line 39, at beginning insert ““intentionally””"
The noble Lord said: The names of the noble Baronesses, Lady Anelay and Lady Seccombe, have been added to the amendments. There are six in the group: Amendments Nos. 121, 122, 125, 129, 132 and 157. They concern the nature of the penalties which may be imposed under the Bill on those who fail to comply with the requirements of the Home Secretary vis-à-vis identity cards and applications for them. It is fair to say that there has been a tendency in modern times for this Parliament to try to dress up as a civil offence that which traditionally would be treated as a criminal offence. The reason, plainly, is that the demands placed on the prosecutor of a civil offence are much less than for a criminal one. The standard of proof is a balance of probabilities rather than beyond reasonable doubt. There does not need to be intent in order to establish the criminality or the offence.
Identity Cards Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Phillips of Sudbury
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 12 December 2005.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Identity Cards Bill 2005-06.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
676 c1073 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 13:49:59 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_285915
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_285915
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_285915