Identity Cards Bill

The amendments are clear, and we understand them. We believe that the issue of ID cards should be compared to the issue of existing documents such as passports or driving licences, for which a fee is charged, rather than a public service, such as education or National Health Service treatment, which is free at the point of use. We entirely accept that some people might find it difficult to pay the full fee for an ID card. However, the Bill provides at Clause 37 a wide range of powers to set fees, including allowing for the payment of fees by instalments. The Government have always made it clear that there would be concessions or discounts for those on low incomes. Not everyone would need to pay the full cost—and we believe that that is fair. Clause 41(4)(b) would allow us to waive fees altogether for particular groups, just as we do for passport fees for people born on or before 2 September 1929, which makes Amendment No. 261 unnecessary. However, it would be wrong to tie our hands completely by requiring all cards to be issued free of charge. The fee charged for an ID card would be only a relatively small uplift on the cost of a passport. We have already published in the regulatory impact assessment our forecast unit cost of £93 for issuing a biometric passport and ID card. I should stress that that is a unit cost, not the actual fee that would be charged, and that around 70 per cent of the unit cost would be accounted for anyway by the cost of introducing biometric passports with both facial image and fingerprint biometrics. A charge of £30 has been announced for a stand-alone ID card that is valid for 10 years at today’s prices. I do not consider it appropriate that £30 is specified in the Bill as a maximum charge, as in Amendment No. 260, tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Phillips. Primary legislation is not the place for specific detail on costs. The Government have made their announcement and, when the first fees are announced, Parliament will have the opportunity to debate them. This may be tempting fate, but I must say that I cannot think of a piece of legislation that sets fees in the way that is proposed in this amendment. Perhaps the noble Lord has an example of that.