By Andy McCue, 7 March 2006 09:30
NEWS
Peers in the House of Lords have again defeated government proposals to make it compulsory for people renewing or applying for passports to register for an ID card.
The Lords voted 227 votes against 166 votes in favour of retaining an amendment to the Identity Cards Bill that would make it voluntary for people to register for an ID card and the national identity register (NIR) when applying for a passport.
The government argued that the House of Lords should not oppose the bill again and instead abide by the Salisbury Convention not to block an election manifesto pledge that has been approved by MPs in the House of Commons.
MPs had rejected the Lords' amendments last month to make it completely voluntary for citizens to register for an ID card and put their personal and biometric details on the NIR when applying for or renewing a passport.
But Liberal Democrat peer Lord Phillips of Sudbury said the government had gone back on its election manifesto pledge to roll out ID cards "initially on a voluntary basis" and argued that forcing people to register for an ID card when renewing or applying for a designated document such as a passport is "compulsion by stealth".
He said: "This bill, via designation, would mean that ID cards would be rolled out initially on a compulsory basis as people renew their passports."
Conservative peer Lord Crickhowell said linking ID cards to passports in this way amounts to "creeping compulsion" for the 85 per cent of the population that use a passport.
Defending the compulsion measure, Home Office minister Baroness Scotland of Asthal said it is "essential" not to allow people to opt out of the national identity register in order for the scheme to deliver its stated benefits of fighting terrorism, illegal immigration and fraud.
She said: "If we provide an opt-out we put all these benefits at risk and certainly delay them. The benefits will grow steadily as more and more people obtain cards. By linking it to passports it means there will be a manageable rollout of the ID cards scheme."
In a vote earlier in the day the Lords gave in to the government on the issue of the cost of the scheme after Home Secretary Charles Clarke agreed at the last vote in the House of Commons to report to parliament every six months on the ID card costs.
Comments
There are 10 comments. Join the discussion
1. Roger Ash
Thank God that at least one of the houses remembers the meaning of the word democracy
2. Karen Challinor
Baroness Scotland of Asthal said it is "essential" not to allow people to opt out of the national identity register in order for the scheme to deliver its stated benefits of fighting terrorism, illegal immigration and fraud
Why is this tired argument is still being trotted out ?
The card will have no effect on terrorism, no effect on illegal immigration and very little effect on fraud
What the card will do is monitor the movements and expenditure of the ordinary law abiding section of the population, those who do not fall into this category will find ways around the system as they always do
3. Chris Tolmie
George Orwell "1984" was right! He was wrong about the date but correct about the technology (we have more CCTVs per head than any other country) and the tracking and recording of us all. I do not know what to do about it - how do I become an objector - refuse to carry ID cards? Where a hoody so that strange security guards can not stare at me?
Chris
4. James Button
Either make them truly compulsory, or not compulsory at all.
If people without passports dont need to have them,then there is no national register, so the whole idea is flawed.
If they are compulsory, then commerce and industry need to be able to 'submit' queries and get a response within minutes either a yes answer, or a visit from a group of police to aprehend the person with the fraudulent ID.
Basically the government has still to 'come clean' on it's intentions, and then re-work the act to provide a effective, efficient, and cost-effective facility, or abandon the idea until they can present a properly prepared and documented proposal.
In it's current form, the act will not provide an adequate facility to prevent terrorism, or identity fraud,
and represents a waste of finances considering what the police could do with an extra 15 billion ponds
5. Jerrold Baldwin
The House of Lords must continue to block ID cards. They are right to, and the opposition parties (who polled about 64% of the votes caste in the last general election) must stand behind them.
The Conservatives should frequently repeat the promise to get rid of ID cards if elected. They should also warn contractors that any compensation for the scheme’s closure would be minimal.
6. Mike
If the government use the Parliament act, we should petition the Monarch to refuse the royal assent, dissolve parliament and call a general election!
This authoritarian government is attacking so many of our liberties, that it is worth provoking a constitutional crisis to stop them.
"He who gives up liberty for the sake of temporary security is deserving of neither" (Benjamin Franklin)
7. Karen Challinor
Travellers, homeless people, visitors and criminals who choose to live outside society will not have an ID card or an entry in the national identification register
The register, compulsory or not, will never have the details of every person in the country and will therefore be of little use in achieving the stated aims of the bill
8. anonymous
Thank some Deity, whomever or whatever he/she/it may be, for the House of Lords. Mr Bliar's government has been chipping away at everyone's personal Liberty for the past few years - not including the civil actions of over 300 camera exposures every day, particularly if you work in the City. It is an old view, but Government either views it citizens as contributors to the common good or potential denizens to be controlled. It was the old Communist Bloc that took the latter view, so why the need for what used to be a Liberal government to take up that legal cudgel? Or, is it the French legal system view taking hold: that we are all just guilty and have not been caught, yet?
9. D Campbell
Everyone should be given an free ID card at birth. All costs of the ID during the life of the person should be covered by the state.
10. Karen Challinor
D Campbell Wrote "Everyone should be given an free ID card at birth. All costs of the ID during the life of the person should be covered by the state"
Where exactly will the state find the money to do this ? - taxes, a hugely unpopular measure
Why does the state want the individual to purchase and ID card and pay to register in the NIR ? - so they don't become unpopular by raising tax levels and also so they don't have to divulge the full cost of the scheme
Why are they fighting tooth and nail to get the word "compulsory" in to the bill? - because they know no one will buy into the scheme once they know how much it will cost