By Andy McCue, 22 March 2006 12:30
NEWS
The government has criticised the House of Lords' repeated blocking of ID cards for trying to delay and destroy the controversial bill.
On Tuesday MPs again voted against a Lords compromise amendment to the ID cards bill that would have made it voluntary for people to register for a card and put their biometric details on the national identity database until 2011.
The government won the House of Commons vote by 284 votes to 241 and the ID cards bill will now return to the Lords for a fifth time on Wednesday, making it one of the most controversial pieces of legislation Labour has tried to implement since 1997 - ahead of the fiercely contested hunting bill.
Home Secretary Charles Clarke said the Lords' continued opposition to the ID cards bill is "unacceptable". "The real intent of the amendment is to make the scheme unworkable," he said.
The government wants to avoid having to use the Parliament Act to force through the ID card legislation as it would mean a further delay in the project and Clarke has vowed to force repeated votes on the bill until peers in the Lords give way to MPs.
Opposition in the Lords is based on what ID card critics such as Liberal Democrat peer Lord Phillips of Sudbury call "compulsion by stealth" - whereby people will be forced to get an ID card and register on the national identity database when applying for or renewing a passport.
Comments
There are 6 comments. Join the discussion
1. anonymous
I beleive that instead of and Id Card what has to be done is a Magnetic Social Security Card for all US Citizens and Legal Residents.
A magnetic card similar to a Drivers Licence and the Green Card.
A magnetic card is more difficult to duplicate that the actual paper Social Security Cards which are actually being sold by inescrupulus people and bought by Illegal Immigrants.
A magnetic Social Security Card will drastically reduce ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION.
Then ask all employers to run such card on a special machine like the machine the Police uses in order to verify Legal Status and if that number is not being used in another part of the country.
Yours very truly
2. Karen Challinor
Again we have a well intentioned post from people who don't know what is going on.
If it were just a card I wouldn't be objecting.
But its the NIR database that will track me from birth to death, monitoring expenditure and movement that I'm disagreeing with.
For example if I spend more money than the government thinks I have, say my mother loaned me something out of the mattress to buy a new sofa, then I can expect a knock on the door asking me where I got it. And I would have to explain cap in hand like some child caught with their hand in the cookie jar, to someone who has no business knowing, for fear of being detained under the pervention of terrorism bill. The whole principle of innocent until proven guilty is turned on it's head.
If I purchase a train ticket or enter a government building (like a library) I will have to use my ID card, thus logging my whereabouts. If some crime is committed nearby I will be rounded up as a suspect as I was in the area. I will then be interviewed and have to explain why I was where I was and what I was doing. Meanwhile the criminals who won't be in the database because they will find ways round the system will be away with their ill gotten goods.
And that is just the start, so please if you are going to post comments, research the issue a little.
It's not like the cards we had in wartime, it's not like the NI or DVLA database and it's not like any other ID card scheme in the world.
3. Radical Meldrew
So Charles Clarke declares that the House of Lords' stance is unacceptable. Why? Does he think its acceptable to steamroller a potentially flawed concept right through our democratic system? Overwhelming public opposition has been ignored and anyone who voices an objection is accused of either having something to hide or supporting terrorism.
Personally I think the card scheme will eventually reveal a hidden purpose, one which will prove useful to central government.
4. Graham Coles
What is Charles Clark saying?
If he is suggesting it is unacceptable for ID cards to be voluntary, they why on earth did his own moronic government state in their election manifesto that they would be?
All the Lords are doing is to ask the government to comply with their own wording - no wonder they are complaining, they are too used to breaking their promises.
Let's hope this keeps up for a few more years - well done to the Lords for sticking to their guns on this issue.
5. Charles
Opinion to Support Lords of UK!!!
What is next?
You don't participate, so you are no longer a citizen in good standing.
You are now closely categorized with a negative rating, making you automatically no longer able to qualify for credit, most or all public services without a constant public reminder that removes you from your 'Right to privacy'. Such as traveling by any means available without being repeatedly searched, questioned, etc; all because you do not scan (compute)!!!!!
6. Simon
Well now we know why uncle Tony was so desparate to dismantle the House of Lords a few years ago. It's obvious that he could see that having another house that wasn't under his control was going to create problems getting bad law passed. No dictator wants scrutiny from people asking difficult questions !