It is certainly true that the amendments before us now are very different, in two important respects. First, as has already been pointed out, they would provide an opt-out only from having the card: a person’s details would still be entered in the register. Lord Armstrong’s first set of amendments refer to the register rather than the holding of the card. Secondly, they introduce the sunset clause referring to 1 January 2010, which simply does not pass the acid test of falling on the other side of the latest conceivable date for a general election.
The Bill is also based, as we know, on a form of covert compulsion by the back door, despite the Government’s own election manifesto commitment to the voluntary introduction of identity cards. That makes the Government’s agreement to introduce separate primary legislation to usher in full-blown compulsion at a later date a largely redundant concession.
Identity Cards Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Nick Clegg
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 29 March 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Identity Cards Bill 2005-06.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
444 c1005 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-01-26 16:47:50 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_313680
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_313680
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_313680