Identity Cards Bill

Funnily enough, I disagree slightly on the matter of serious crime. I would prefer to see something like ““crimes against the person””. Most of the public want to feel that they are safe walking around the streets, that they are safe at night, and that you catch the burglars, the muggers, the murderers and rapists. The public would feel that there was some genuine use for this legislation as regards that sort of thing. To many people, serious crime tends to be the big crimes, the big gangs and so on. If it was useful for crimes against the person, I do not think the public would have any problems with releasing their information to the police if it was going to help clear up those sorts of things. We come, therefore, to the real purpose of the ID card. It is certainly not what has been published; we have dealt with that already. The purpose is for the commissioners of Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs to be able to track things. This is what really worries me. I think the purpose is to be able to track money. At the moment, we have a very high tax regime. We know there are lot of people out there perhaps not complying exactly with all the things they should be, and that there is a large grey economy. Isabelle and I have always been careful about this. Having a title, you have to be careful, as sooner or later you will be investigated. I have been investigated twice in the past, merely because they could not believe a Lord was as poor as I was. Actually, I asked for it the second time around. The trouble is that this will be applied selectively. When HMRC decides that it wants to investigate someone, it can do a trawl in connection with that investigation to try to find out what else is happening. If you are one of the unlucky ones within whatever percentage it is of those under investigation, it is going to get you, because very few people out there can remember everything they have paid for in cash and so on. If HMRC is to be given this sort of powers, that has to go hand in glove with rationalising whatever forces the grey economy to exist. Therefore, the tax system and other areas must be reviewed so that they do not bear unfairly on those who, by lottery, are picked out for investigation. That is why I would like to see this part of the Bill suppressed until there is a fairer system that would not give rise to unfair investigations into those who are picked out. Paragraphs (a) to (f) should be left out at this stage. When there is a review of the tax system that is fairer, maybe we should consider putting them in—but not yet.