Identity Cards Bill

The noble Baroness has done the Committee a service in bringing forward amendments which are in their very nature, as she said, more straightforward than mine. I assumed Amendment No. 138 meant something rather different from that assumed by the noble Lord, Lord Phillips of Sudbury. I found it to have great resonance with what I am trying to achieve: an honesty whereby Clauses 6 and 7 are the only parts of the Bill which enforce compulsion. I found refuge in Amendment No. 138 in that it appears to require that before Clauses 6 and 7 come into effect, the whole process must be truly voluntary in the sense that an individual can opt into the system if he chooses but is not forced to have the document. I found this a very straightforward—I would not call it simple because the noble Baroness is never simple—way of achieving a laudable objective. I also welcome Amendment No. 161, which will give noble Lords the opportunity to consider, between now and Report, what should be the rights of people to obtain services to which they are freely entitled—by which I mean free at the point of use. What right do they have to continue to have access to those services without having first to apply for an identity card? These are essential amendments; it is unfortunate that they have been reached at our current state of play but that is the way things happen. I welcome the opportunity to consider these more between now and Report.