Identity Cards Bill

That is a clever point from the noble Lord but, as I explained, Parliament will have the opportunity to debate fees through the process of secondary legislation. Amendment No. 260 would also mean that no charges could be levied for modifications to the register under Clause 12. Amendment No. 176 would preclude charges being levied for the reissue or replacement of an ID card if it is cancelled through no fault of the individual. We are assuming that no charge will be levied for maintenance transactions of the register that do not require a new ID card to be issued, such as change of address—so I am afraid that I do not consider the point that the noble Lord made about students relevant. However, it may be necessary to charge for changes that require a new ID card to be issued, as well as for the replacement of lost or stolen ID cards. There will also be a fee charged for the reissue or replacement of expired ID cards. It would not be practical to introduce a fault test to any charges that could be levied under this clause. How would one establish whether an individual was not at fault in losing their card for the third time in six months? I can think of occasions when, certainly, younger people mislay their precious cards—whatever those cards happen to be—fairly frequently. We have to make people think and act responsibly in this matter. It is right that the maintenance process should allow for a fee to be charged, in particular in those cases where a new card needs to be issued. We intend that the charging regime decided in the future will be reasonable. The fee regime will be set in regulations made under Clause 37 nearer the introduction of ID cards in 2008 so there will, as I said, be an opportunity for Parliament to consider the actual fees proposed. The Bill has been amended already to make the first fee order subject to the affirmative resolution procedure. Amendments Nos. 263 to 267 would require the Secretary of State to have directly incurred any expenses which he could prescribe fees to recover. Our intention is that we should have as flexible a fee regime as possible, subject to one important proviso: we cannot run the overall scheme at a profit and use the net revenue to fund other public services. This is not an identity card tax. However, given the range of services offered by the scheme—registration, card issuing, accreditation of organisations using the scheme to check identity and the validation of information recorded in the register, to name but a few—it is reasonable to allow for flexibility in setting charges for individual services subject, of course, to the very important principle that in total we are not raising more in charges than it costs to run the scheme. The way that the amendments are worded would also introduce an unwelcome degree of uncertainty into the application of the fee regime. It could suggest that the costs of paying others for relevant work—for example, specialists in information technology—could not be taken into account in setting fees under the Bill. I suggest that is not a sensible way to limit the power. Amendment No. 268 would make all fee-related orders subject to the affirmative resolution procedure. This goes further than the recommendation from the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee report, which was that orders merely to keep pace with inflation should remain subject to negative procedures. We had a brief discussion on that earlier. We have considered the report and are inclined to agree that the power to set fees should be subject to the affirmative resolution procedure, apart from the regular uprating of fees to take account of inflation. In a spirit of compromise I assure Members of the Committee that if they withdraw this amendment we will return on Report with a suitable replacement. I think that that answers most of the points raised by the three noble Lords who contributed to the debate. I have a little more information on students. As I have already told the Committee, the intention is that students will have a choice whether to keep temporary term-time addresses on the register or register their home address. It is not intended to keep addresses on the card or to charge a fee for a change of address. I want to make that clear although I believe that I did so earlier.