Identity Cards Bill

I understand the premise on which the noble Baroness, Lady Anelay, has moved her amendment. However, I should say to her that our plans are such that the requirement to provide information for the verification of details supplied will generally be limited to other government databases such as those cited by the noble Baroness—the DVLA or the Department for Work and Pensions—which I am sure she would not disagree with. Nothing in her remarks caused me to think so. However, we think it important that this power should remain in the Bill if it becomes apparent over time that people are slipping through the net for verification purposes. The noble Baroness questioned the issue of private databases and whether they are 100 per cent correct. However, the UK Passport Service already checks credit reference agency data as part of its identity verification process. Clause 11 would allow the Secretary of State to make orders requiring private organisations to verify information held on their databases in appropriate circumstances. It is not unreasonable to imagine a set of circumstances in which a check with a credit reference agency could prove useful in establishing an individual’s biographical footprint. It may be that in the future further decisions would be made with regard to the databases of other private organisations. It is worth noting that by removing subsection (5)(e), the Secretary of State would be prevented from specifying, for example, the Scottish Executive as a body required to provide verification information. I am sure noble Lords agree that that would create an unnecessary anomaly. I take this opportunity to emphasise the point that information which may be verified is limited to such information that is, could be or was intended to be recorded on the register. In practice, the power will be used in relation to details such as name, address and date of birth. This power does not enable the Secretary of State to record any additional information on the register. It is purely to verify information already provided or available. I am delighted to answer the noble Baroness on the point about Tesco, although I do not know why she did not mention Waitrose, Marks & Spencer or Sainsbury’s as well. I can say to her that there is no intention so to do. Amendments Nos. 268A and 268B would limit the persons who can be specified in an order which requires them to provide information for verifying something in a passport application under Clause 39 to those named in subsection (3)(a) to (d), in effect Ministers of the Crown, government departments, the Northern Ireland Office, the National Assembly for Wales and any other person who carries out functions conferred by or under an enactment that fall to be carried out on behalf of the Crown. I resist these amendments on the same basis and for the same reasons that I resisted Amendments Nos. 165 and 166, to which I have already referred.