Identity Cards Bill

I very much support what the noble Earl, Lord Erroll, has said. The noble Lord, Lord Phillips, put his finger on something that we ought to watch for. The noble Baroness in her charming way—I am quite sure she would be no part of any government that would abuse this—overwhelmingly made the case for the word ““necessary”” being perfectly adequate to the needs of any reasonable government. She has not sought to make the case for the wider words ““connected with””. If we are to permit the wider words ““connected with””, we ought to be given an explanation of why those wider words are needed rather than an explanation of why there is a backstop in the form of the European Convention on Human Rights. That is the gist of the noble Baroness’s argument—that if they went too far they would contravene the convention and then the citizen would have the right to take a case to Strasbourg. That is, of course, one of the easiest and most convenient things you can ever offer to a citizen. However, one must be careful about introducing irony into politics because the irony always drops out of the printed page and I shall be accused of saying how easy and convenient it is to take a case to Strasbourg. People will say, ““It is a lawyer””.