Identity Cards Bill

My Lords, I have been in this House for only 43 years. When I first came here I was confused at all levels, but the longer I stayed here I found that I was confused at a higher and higher level until today. Today I am confused at the lowest level that I have ever been confused at in your Lordships’ House, thanks in part to the wisdom of the noble Baroness opposite who has moved sideways, backwards and shifted from one sand to another. I hope that what I say may be of help because, as the noble Baroness knows, throughout I have believed in the passport and an identity card related to the passport and not related to anything else. For a brief moment she suggested that the passport might have had its day and that it would be useful only for travel. As she knows well, it has been confirmed to me in two Parliamentary Questions that the passport is the ultimate proof of identity worldwide. As I have been unable to obtain answers to questions I have asked the Government, I have done my own research among 18 of the 22 countries that are in the EEA. I have asked them what information they have at present and how they feel about the matter. The Minister said how delighted the French were that we were going to have identity cards. However, only a year ago they gave up all requirements for foreign residents to have an identity card. No green card is required in France. Other countries are following the same pattern as regards freedom of movement. The question, therefore, is, what is the purpose of an identity card if you have a passport? The only purpose is greater convenience. It is smaller and it allows you to travel within the EEA states. However, it does not allow you to travel anywhere else. It is not proof of your identity if you wish to cash a cheque. It is not acceptable to banks as proof of identity. It is acceptable as proof of identity only in enabling you to cross the frontier within those 22 states. Previously, I suggested to the noble Baroness that it was not necessary to make the identity card compulsory because, if it was worthwhile, people would have it. I would like one. If I can choose my own number that I can remember, can I have 00111? I would like one straightaway. We know that biometric passports are a good idea and that other countries are adopting them. They should have been rolled out in the United Kingdom in October 2005. When will they be rolled out? As we know, the biometric passport will not have five or 10 fingerprints, it will have limited information. No one who does not have a reader will be able to tell who the person is other than from the photograph. The biometric aspect of that is of value only to those who can read it. As I have said before, I would like to have as much information as I possibly can on my identity card, but I do not want the Government to have any because it is my information. A rather interesting point is beginning to come up. As the noble Baroness or the noble Lord, Lord Bassam, pointed out recently, all the countries have different requirements. I have already pointed out that the Germans found it impossible to accept what we are proposing because their data protection Act effectively forbids it. Foreigners in this country should after 90 days—and that means anyone who has a job over here because they will have a job for more than 90 days—supposedly compulsorily register at some time in the future and must have certain information on their card to prove their identity, but to whom? They will already have got into the country. The noble Baroness was kind enough to answer the question that one thing they will not have on their identity card is their nationality. That is totally incomprehensible. If a foreigner is over here, the first thing you want to know is what his nationality is. My confusion goes further. The noble Baroness said today that there will be one identity card linked to the passport—certainly at this stage. There will not be one linked to the driving licence and so on. Will she confirm—as she said once in Committee—that there will be only one identity card, that it will be a biometric identity card linked to a biometric passport and that it will be voluntary? As the noble Baroness pointed out, although 80 per cent of people in this country have passports and 4 million are issued each year, it does not take someone to do a cheap crossword to work out how long the process will take. But as we have almost more passports per capita than any other country in the world, we are nearly there. By my calculations 92 per cent of people who will travel, or would like to travel, already have passports. The older people who decide that they do not want to travel will not be in the same position as people in the continental countries which have an identity card that enables them to travel to neighbouring countries. I again find it unnecessary to do anything more than point out that this measure could easily be voluntary. It could be sold to people. This morning when I arrived at an airport to travel to this House, I found for the first time that my right finger, having not worked too hard in the garden, let me jump the queue. I put my card in a slot. Of the 120 people queuing, there were only two in my short queue. That was great. The card does not cost me anything; I have it because I am a regular traveller. The whole concept of biometrics is not of concern; the compulsion aspect is. The Minister kindly acknowledged that it will be some time before the primary legislation is introduced to make the measure compulsory. Therefore, there will be a consultation period. We could consider that the whole idea of having an identity register in addition to the Passport Office and the identity card is a complete and utter waste of time. What will the identity card do? It will not be acceptable to security services or to anyone in a shop. It is strange that although your driving licence is meant to be proof of identity, it is not. It is pretty difficult to see anyway. So, in general, it is not acceptable as proof of identity. Nor, for example, are any of your credit cards acceptable as proof of identity. Should you wish to purchase something in one country or another, in many of them the only proof of identity that is acceptable is your passport. The identity card is not proof of identity, for example, for the purchase of a car in Germany. How can we so enhance the identity card to give it a real value rather than just convenience? We raised many of these points at Second Reading when other people did not listen to them. One of the problems we face is that the public at large—if you can call them that—have not understood that this Bill is mainly about an identity register. They are not opposed to the principle of having identity cards provided they will be helpful. I do not think that people are too opposed to the fingerprint concept. Already I find that with my parliamentary iPac rather than trying to remember the number—which was the date of Napoleon’s death, but I have forgotten exactly when he died—I can use my fingerprint for identity purposes. Will the Minister confirm that we are to have only one identity card at this stage? Could it please be voluntary? What will we do about the foreigner who wants to come here? Will we insist that he should have an identity card? I think the noble Baroness may find that that would put off a lot of people considering longer term employment over here. There is a real concern about the dishing out of data and a belief of some in perfide Albion that effectively we are in league with the United States and that information will run from one country to another. As the Minister knows, in Switzerland, Germany and four other countries the transfer of data to third parties, or even to different parties within government, is not possible. I sense that the Minister has shifted her ground very much, in a very charming way. I am very pleased that she lost the vote; it was quite right that she should do, because the voluntary method is better than anything else. As I was driving through the storms in Europe last week, I suddenly thought to myself, ““Goodness me, why am I thinking of nationalisation?”” That was one of the first things that I opposed in your Lordships’ House, from this very place; it was on shipbuilding. I thought, ““You know what this Bill is doing? It is stealing my nationality. It is nationalising the British people””. It is taking the data away from me and not letting me know what I have got, because I would not be able to remember it anyway. I can still remember Sloane 1234, which I think was the telephone number for Harrods, but I cannot remember more than three or four numbers at a time. As for alpha-numeric combinations, they are pretty difficult. I am not being anti-anything; I would simply like the Minister to confirm that we will have only one identity card for the foreseeable future, that the card will be linked to the passport and that there will be no need to have a central identity register until some time in the future.