ID card rebels cut Government majority to 31
ID card rebels cut Government majority to 31 - Britain - Times Online
By Times Online and Agencies
The Government’s majority slumped to 31 over the introduction of identity cards tonight in the first backbench revolt of the new Parliament.
MPs gave the Identity Cards Bill a second reading by 314 to 283, after a rebel amendment to block the measure was withdrawn.
It was the first real test of Mr Blair’s reduced 67-strong majority since Labour was returned to power in May.
It was the first real test of Mr Blair’s reduced 67-strong majority since Labour was returned to power in May.
The Bill is certain to face tough examination in committee, with critics demanding concessions on data privacy and costs.
Home Secretary Charles Clarke went some way to meeting those concerns today offering to cap the cost of ID cards but refusing to set a figure.
Mr Clarke insisted ID cards would act as a “bulwark against the Big Brother society,” providing “real benefits to the individual and society” by limiting the scope for identity theft.
There would be no open access to the information held on individuals and ethnic minorities had no reason to fear the scheme, he said.
Twenty one Labour backbenchers signed the withdrawn amendment to block the Bill’s second reading because it made “no significant contribution to the reduction or eradication of terrorism”.
Labour critic David Winnick (Walsall N) gave the Home Secretary an early taste of the strength of feeling, warning: “If this measure was on a free vote tonight, it would certainly be thrown out.”
The plans have also come under fire from the Information Commissioner Richard Thomas who dubbed them excessive and disproportionate, while a London School of Economics report warned the scheme could eventually cost £20 billion, or £300 per card.
Mr Clarke said Mr Thomas’s analysis was “incorrect,” adding: “I argue the ID card system is a bulwark against the surveillance society, the Big Brother society, and not a further contribution to it.”
Mr Clarke told critics of the cost of the scheme that he would set a cap on it before the Bill left the Commons. “It would be ridiculous to have an expensive card which people were, in some sense, forced to buy. But that is not what we will have,” he said.
Mr Clarke acknowledged there were serious practical concerns over the legislation and offered to look at resolving these in committee.
“I argue that the identity card has real benefits to the individual and society and the ID card is a means of limiting abuse in our modern information society, rather than a means of adding to it ... “It gives individuals the right to secure verification of their identity.”
Amid concerns raised on both sides of the House about the security of data held, Mr Clarke said: “There will be no open access to information on the register. “Private companies will not be able to access or buy national identity register entries.
The Bill made no difference to police stop and search powers and there would be no requirement for people to carry ID cards at all times.
The Muslim community would not be “unfairly targeted,” Mr Clarke vowed. “Ethnic minority communities, like other communities, have no reason to fear the ID card system.”
But Labour’s Diane Abbott (Hackney N and Stoke Newington) warned that while the Bill did not contain an extension of police powers it did have an “extension of pretext” by which the police could stop people.
“The last thing we need is a piece of legislation which will further turn the screw on community relations in our big towns,” she said. Shadow home secretary David Davis accused the Government of chipping away at the basic liberties of its citizens.
“Today, the party that in 1945 promised that generation welfare from cradle to grave is about to give this generation surveillance from cradle to grave,” he said. “The Home Secretary’s proposals represent a fundamental shift in the balance of power between the citizen and the state.
“They are not just excessive, but also expensive. Not just illiberal, but also impractical. Not just unnecessary, but also unworkable.”
For the Liberal Democrats, Mark Oaten said the costs of the project were “spiralling out of control” and it might be this that ultimately defeated the scheme.
The whole thing was a mess that would make “the Child Support Agency mess-up look like a tea party”, he said. “It is illiberal. It is wrong and it won’t work.”
Leading Labour rebel Lynne Jones (Birmingham Selly Oak) said the “dumb and dangerous” legislation should be “killed at birth”. It was not the idea of ID cards that was objectionable but the creation of a database of personal details.
Urging party colleagues to join the opposition to the Bill, she said the vote was “more serious than the decision to go to war”.
But Labour former Home Office minister John Denham said he believed ID cards and the National Identity Register were necessary and would vote for second reading. He accused critics of overstating the level of intrusion they posed, the cost, and the risk of failure.
July 24, 2005 at 01:44 PM in Smart Cards | Permalink
| TrackBack (8)
| Top of page
| Blog Home
