I am sorry, but we must all heed Madam Deputy Speaker’s words of warning and we need to make our points in the short time that is available.
Lord Armstrong of Ilminster is moving towards that sort of voluntary scheme, and I could happily live with that. Even Lord Phillips said that his amendment"““would have meant that the citizen had an option—effectively, for five years—on whether he or she wished to have an ID card.””—[Official Report, House of Lords, 28 March 2006; Vol. 680, c. 645.]"
If he means by that that one would be on the ID register but could choose whether to have an ID card, he should support the solution that is beginning to emerge. It is the ID register that is important, not the actual possession of a card.
When my passport runs out and I have to renew it, I cannot see that it will make much difference if an ID card is thrown in as well. I shall be happy because it provides an additional form of identity. The point was made in the last debate—it is central to the issue of voluntary and compulsory—that the information one gives to the Passport and Records Agency to renew one’s passport is exactly the same as that required to go on the ID register. It consists of name, address, date and place of birth and nationality or immigration status—
Identity Cards Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Martin Linton
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 29 March 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Identity Cards Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
444 c887 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 21:57:02 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_313367
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_313367
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_313367