United Kingdom Parliament
Publications & records
Advanced search
 HansardArchivesResearchHOC PublicationsHOL PublicationsCommittees
Previous Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page

COMMONS AMENDMENTS

The Commons have made the following consequential Amendments to the Bill—
1D Page 46, leave out from end of line 17 to "unless" in line 19 and insert "or, if the Lord Chancellor is not a member of that House, by another Minister of the Crown at his request.
(4) No motion for the presentation of such an address may be made"
1E Page 46, line 25, leave out from "and" to end of line 26 and insert "a person making such a motion in the House of Lords shall lay a copy of the report before that House before making the motion."
1F Page 221, line 18, at end insert—
"Judicature (Northern Ireland) Act 1978 (c. 23)


(1) Section 12B of the Judicature (Northern Ireland) Act 1978 as substituted by section 6 of the Justice (Northern Ireland) Act 2002 (c. 26) is amended as follows.
(2) In subsection (3)(b) at the end insert "or, if the Lord Chancellor is not a member of that House, by another Minister of the Crown at his request."
(3) In subsections (4) and (5) for "Neither the Prime Minister nor the Lord Chancellor may make" substitute "The Prime Minister may not make, and the Lord Chancellor may not make or request the making of,".
 
21 Mar 2005 : Column 46
 

(4) In subsection (7) for the words from "and the Lord Chancellor" to the end substitute "and a person making such a motion in the House of Lords shall lay a copy of them before that House before making the motion.""

Lord Falconer of Thoroton: My Lords, I spoke to the amendments with Amendment No. 1B. I beg to move.

Moved, That the House do agree with the Commons in their Amendments Nos. 1D to 1F.—(Lord Falconer of Thoroton.)

[Amendments Nos. 1DA to 1FA not moved.]

On Question, Motion agreed to.

Identity Cards Bill

The Minister of State, Home Office (Baroness Scotland of Asthal): My Lords, I beg to move that this Bill be now read a second time. Our identities are precious and need to be protected. The Identity Cards Bill establishes a clear legislative framework for an identity cards scheme that will enable everyone aged 16 and over and resident in the United Kingdom to hold a biometric identity card, linked to a national identity register.

Clause 1 establishes clear statutory purposes for the scheme so that there is no possibility of confusion as to what it is for. Clause 1(3)(a) makes it clear that the purpose of the identity cards scheme is, first, to provide people with a convenient method of proving their identity. That is exactly why most people want identity cards.

Current means of identification are simply not secure or reliable enough. This was pointed out clearly in Identity Fraud: A Study, published by the Cabinet Office in 2002. However good the security printing of existing documents is, there is always a risk that they can be forged. Existing documents cannot link an individual to a single, unique identity, whereas a biometric identity card scheme will allow each and every one of us to prove conclusively that we are who we say we are whenever we need to prove our identity. Anyone who has teenage children will know the importance to them of being able to prove their age. A biometric identity card will do that quickly and easily.

Photographic identity documents are increasingly required in a wide range of circumstances; for example, by low-cost airlines, even for domestic flights. That creates problems for people, often elderly people, who do not have a current passport or photo-card driving licence. Identity cards will fill the gap.

We cannot stand still in the knowledge of the threats that we all face from identity fraud. Not only does it cost the country an estimated £1.3 billion per year, but it creates real concerns for those of us at risk and real problems for the victims of fraudsters. Not surprisingly, sales of shredders have increased dramatically in recent years, as people have realised the importance of shredding personal and financial documents. A recent report published in Which? showed that a quarter of those questioned knew
 
21 Mar 2005 : Column 47
 
someone who had had their identity taken and misused or had experienced that personally. It is no wonder that the same survey showed that more than two-thirds of us were concerned about identity fraud.

As a guard against financial fraud, reliable proof of identity is rightly needed before a bank or building society account can be opened or a large financial transaction made. By removing the need to rely on existing documents such as passports or insecure documents such as utility bills, biometric identity cards will provide the answer.

In accordance with standards laid down by the International Civil Aviation Organisation, our own biometric British passports with a facial image biometric will be introduced in about a year's time. These will become a requirement for international travel. For example, the United States has already made clear that countries which do not provide their citizens with biometric passports will be excluded from its visa waiver scheme. Thus if the United Kingdom were not to introduce its own biometric passports, British citizens visiting the United States would first have to obtain a visa.

Lord Maclennan of Rogart: My Lords, I am extremely grateful to the noble Baroness for giving way. Is there any intention to achieve reciprocity in this respect? Do the British Government intend to make similar demands of American citizens?

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, the British Government have not come to a view on that, but it is important to acknowledge what the position is in relation to the international community. It is not only the Americans who have taken this view. Noble Lords will know that our other European partners are also looking at biometric data in relation to passports. We may soon face a situation where the main way in which identity will be verified will be by using biometric data. That is the reality, irrespective of what our American colleagues across the water choose to do.

It is important to recognise that if the United Kingdom does not introduce its own biometric passports, British citizens travelling not only to the United States, but also elsewhere, may in due course find themselves in more difficulty than is necessary.

Much of the cost of introducing identity cards will need to be incurred in any case to keep our passports up to acceptable international standards. This will include the plans we have already announced for the introduction of personal interviews for all first-time passport applicants. It really does make good sense for us now to build on the existing plans for biometric passports to provide our own biometric identity card scheme. This is a sensible addition.

Some 80 per cent of adults already hold a passport. On our current plans this would allow for the issue of the first identity cards in 2008 by a new agency incorporating the United Kingdom Passport Service and working closely with the Immigration and Nationality Directorate of the Home Office.
 
21 Mar 2005 : Column 48
 

The Bill defines biometric information at Clause 43 as being data about external characteristics. These include facial biometrics, fingerprints and iris images.

Lord Campbell-Savours: My Lords, will my noble friend give way? Does she know why DNA has been excluded?

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, DNA has been excluded because it is clear that if DNA material were to be included, it would go beyond simply making this a means of identification.

I know that we are about to have a long and interesting debate, but I should very much like to open it so that we could then have that debate.

Baroness Ludford: My Lords, the noble Baroness is making a connection between the international requirement for biometric identifiers on passports and the ID cards that the Government wish to introduce. However, can she confirm that the ICAO standard for passports is just a digitised photograph? It does not include fingerprints or any other biometric identifiers. I think that that point needs to be made clear if the ID card is purported to be based on international passport requirements.

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, of course the ICAO digitised photograph requirement is one thing, but the noble Baroness will know that three methods are currently under consideration. The first is the iris image, the second relates to facial recognition and the third is fingerprints. By fashioning our scheme so that it can respond to those three different types of identification, we are better preparing ourselves for the future.

My noble friend is right to point out that DNA is not being used. As I said, there has been much debate and concerns have been expressed about the inappropriate use of such data and whether they are truly to be used simply as a means of identification only. We think that by restricting the data to facial biometrics, fingerprints and iris images, we will draw a line that makes it crystal clear that this is for identification and no other purpose.

Biometrics are a new concept and some have asked us the obvious question: will it work? I can reassure noble Lords that the National Physical Laboratory carried out a study in 2003 and published a report which concluded that:

Not only that, but the United Kingdom Passport Service has also carried out a trial of biometric enrolment of a sample of some 10,000 individuals to test the practicalities of enrolling biometrics. This has included using a mobile enrolment unit that could travel to rural areas as well as to offshore islands.

In addition, we are looking very carefully at the real and practical difficulties that might be faced by some groups of individuals, for example the elderly, the
 
21 Mar 2005 : Column 49
 
housebound and those with special needs because of illness or disability. I cannot give detailed answers today on how we will deal with every one of those groups when the identity card scheme is introduced. However, I can say that officials in the identity cards programme are in contact with representatives of special interest groups, for example the Royal National Institute for the Blind, and I give a commitment that we will look sensitively at all genuine reasons for special treatment in the process of obtaining an identity card. We have recently undertaken research among race, faith, disabled and other groups to identify the special needs of particular groups in the design of the scheme. This includes people with hearing difficulties, with impaired sight and with arthritis. We will be publishing the research later this month.

The legislation allows for this and Clause 41(4) makes clear that any regulations made under the Bill can make different provision for different cases, and can provide for exemptions and exceptions.

The identity cards scheme is being introduced not only as a convenient way for individuals to prove their identity, it is also necessary in the wider public interest. This is the second arm of the statutory purposes as set out in Clause 1(3)(b) and (4). The public interest is defined in five ways, and I think it would be helpful if I deal with each of them in turn.

First, we have national security. Identity cards on their own will not stop the risk of terrorism. However, we have been advised that they will help. We have also been advised that more than one third of terrorist suspects are known to have used false identities. We should be clear that identity cards will not somehow prevent suicide bombers, but they will disrupt the activities of those who aid and abet terrorism by hiding behind multiple and false identities. By making it harder or impossible to assume a false identity, or to use multiple identities, it will be much more difficult for terrorists to ply their trade, and there is no doubt that the introduction of identity cards will help the police and security services in their work.

The second part of the public interest definition is the prevention or detection of crime. I can reassure your Lordships that the police will have no new powers to demand proof of identity or to require people to produce an identity card in the street as a result of this Bill. It will be possible for the police to seek information from the national identity register to check an individual's identity with or without that individual's consent, provided that it can be justified for the prevention or detection of crime.

In the case of biometric information, Clause 23 means that the police will have first to check their own records before seeking the provision of information from the register about a suspect's photograph or fingerprints, and Parliament will also be able to agree specific rules as provided for in Clause 23 on how information will be provided to the police or other organisations. These will include provisions such as the level in the organisation at which the request must be approved.
 
21 Mar 2005 : Column 50
 

We have also protected the most sensitive area of the register—the records of how the card or database entry has been checked previously (paragraph 9 of Schedule 1). This information can be provided only for purposes connected with the prevention and detection of serious crime or for the existing statutory purposes of the intelligence and security agencies.

The third part of the public interest definition is the enforcement of immigration controls. Most people will be entered on the register when they apply for a designated document. Clauses 4 and 10 provide for this. It is intended to designate British passports issued to United Kingdom residents. Once designated, anyone over the age of 16 applying for a British passport will be entered on the national identity register and will be issued also with an identity card. The passport and identity card will be issued as a package and it will no longer be an option to obtain a passport on its own once it has been designated.

In the case of foreign residents, the intention is to designate the residence documents issued to foreign nationals and for these to double as an identity card. What this means is that, once designated, anyone applying for these documents and legally resident in the United Kingdom will have had their identity verified to the highest standard and will have been issued with a biometric ID card. This will act as a major deterrent to illegal immigration as eventually everyone resident here legally will have a biometric ID card which will confirm their identity as well as their right to reside here and, if they are only a temporary resident, such as a foreign student, any limits on their stay.

The fourth part of the public interest definition is the enforcement of prohibitions on illegal working. One of the key pull factors for illegal immigrants is our healthy employment market, combined with the fact that even the most reputable of employers can find it is too easy to be hoodwinked by forged papers.

We are stepping up our enforcement activity against illegal working. During 2004 the Immigration Service carried out 1,618 operations against illegal working. In the future, the possession of an identity card which confirms an individual's right to work in the United Kingdom will make it much easier for the vast majority of legitimate employers to ensure that they comply with the law. It will also make prosecution of unscrupulous employers simpler.

The final public interest is to secure the efficient and effective provision of public services. Clauses 15 to 17 allow Parliament to approve regulations for public services to require an identity card to be produced before an individual accesses a particular service. This is not a "one size fits all" provision. Parliament will have to approve individual regulations for individual services and there are obligations on the Government to consult about any proposals. However, the principle is surely right that when seeking access to a public service such as free health treatment, or applying for the payment of state benefits, an individual should be asked to produce an identity card that confirms his or her identity as a first step in
 
21 Mar 2005 : Column 51
 
proving entitlement to the service. Of course, as we have always made clear, this will not interfere with the delivery of emergency healthcare or other services. As I have already explained, we expect that most people will obtain their ID card when they apply for a British passport or a foreign national's residence permit.

However, the Government have been clear that the identity cards scheme which is being introduced is designed to become compulsory. We therefore need to have the debate on the principle of compulsion now. The provisions on compulsion are in Clauses 6, 7 and 9 and are about the timing of compulsion and the precise categories of people who will be required to register. It would be possible to phase in this requirement for different categories at different times and to exempt certain groups, such as, perhaps, the very elderly. The Government must publish their reasons for compulsion, they must allow both Houses of Parliament to comment on their proposition for compulsion and must take account of these comments before laying an order before both Houses. Under this so-called super-affirmative procedure both Houses must then agree to the order setting a date for compulsion.

The means of enforcing the compulsion to register are via civil financial penalties. It will not be a criminal offence to fail to register when the scheme is compulsory because we do not see the need to burden the police and the criminal courts with enforcing the scheme. We will use civil means. Clauses 34 and 35 set out the procedure for objecting to or appealing against any civil penalty that may be imposed.

I express my gratitude to the Joint Committee on Human Rights for its contribution to the debate on the Government's proposals, and welcome both its letter to my right honourable friend the Home Secretary and its subsequent report.

As my right honourable friend said in his reply of 8 February to the committee, which was published in its report, the Government are confident that the identity card proposals are compatible with their obligations under the European Convention on Human Rights. The fact is that 21 of the 25 EU member states already have an identity card scheme. Apart from the United Kingdom and Ireland only Latvia and Denmark do not currently have ID cards and Latvia has already announced plans to introduce them next year (2006) and Denmark already has a Central Person Register which contains identity and address details with a unique number to identify every resident.

The committee took the view that it is not the compulsory issue of ID cards which raises convention issues, but the storage and disclosure of information on the register. The Government believe that the limitations which have been placed on the information which may be held on the register and the safeguards which regulate the information which may be disclosed from the register ensure that the interference with Article 8 is proportionate.
 
21 Mar 2005 : Column 52
 

I can confirm to the House that a delegated powers memorandum on the Bill was submitted to the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee on 7 March of this year.

The Identity Cards Bill is a piece of enabling legislation and so it cannot be expected to include all the detailed administrative procedures for the card scheme on the face of the Bill. Although there are a large number of delegated powers—some 60 in all—many of the separate powers relate to the same issue, for example the application process for an ID card and the format of the card itself. Many of the precise administrative details will depend on the continuing work of designing the scheme and will need to be finalised much nearer the launch of the identity cards scheme which is currently planned for 2008. These details will also, rightly, be subject to change and amendment after the identity cards scheme is launched so as to take account of future developments.

The Government will, of course, look very carefully at the views of the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee on the Bill, when its report is published.

We intend that the first biometric identity cards should be issued in 2008 and there will be further opportunities between now and then for your Lordships to look at the detailed provisions to be set out in secondary legislation.

The simple fact is that the possession of a clear, unequivocal and unique form of identity—in the shape of a card linked to a database holding biometrics—will offer clear benefits to us all. That is why 80 per cent of the public in recent surveys say that they support the introduction of ID cards.

I shall, of course, listen with great interest to the points that noble Lords have to make both on the Bill itself but also on the practical implementation of the identity cards scheme—something which we have become very accustomed to hearing from the noble Baroness, Lady Anelay. However, the Government are convinced that the introduction of identity cards is in the interests of the nation.

I hope that the noble Baroness, Lady Anelay, will confirm her party's unequivocal support for the principle of identity cards—which I understand is the clearly expressed view of the leader of Her Majesty's Loyal Opposition in another place.

The current debate on identity cards began over three years ago, and we have proceeded in a measured way through consultation on the principles and, most recently, on draft legislation. We have no intention of wavering, and the Government are now determined to press ahead with the introduction of identity cards starting, on current plans, in 2008. The Bill sets out a clear legal framework for the scheme.

Identity cards will provide a means for everyone legally resident in this country to assert their right to be here and to help them gain access to the services to which they are justly entitled. Identity cards will help to preserve national security and assist the work of the
 
21 Mar 2005 : Column 53
 
law enforcement agencies. The Bill will enable the public to have the identity card systems that they say they want. I commend the Bill to the House.

Moved, That the Bill be now read a second time.—(Baroness Scotland of Asthal.)


Next Section Back to Table of Contents Lords Hansard Home Page