Identity Cards Bill

I never try to give away too much but I am a generous fellow, and it was my amendment. I did not want to do any more than the noble Baroness said, and I will not repeat it because it would be boring. What the noble Lord said about wanting a flexible regime is all very well but there is anxiety about what people will have to pay. The anxiety is partly because there is so little hard information about costs, but there is also genuine concern about just how the Government will behave in terms of making concessions to different groups. Given that he does not like my attempts at putting a bit more framework around the charging provisions, would there be some purpose in meeting to see whether anything can be done, beyond the affirmative resolution for the basic setting of fees, to provide a little solace and a little framework? One of the points the Minister raised, which is germane to all this, is whether the Government intend to offset the revenue that they generate through selling the services of the register to the private sector. Do they intend to offset revenues against the expenses by reference to which they will set charges? For example, if—to take the extreme case—the annual running cost of the register was recouped by sales of services to the private sector, would that mean the Government would not be charging at all, for notifications of changes of address, for example? Is that what the noble Lord was hinting at? These are difficult issues, but I would be most grateful if we could try to come back on Report with something a bit more specific, which may address this issue and others.