Clause 11 - Power to require information for validating Register
Identity Cards Bill
9:15 am
Patrick Mercer (Shadow Minister (Homeland Security), (Assisted By Shadow Law Officers); Newark, Conservative)
Good morning, Mr. Hood. It is nice to see you, as it is all the hon. Ladies and Gentlemen in the Room this morning.
Amendment No. 228 leads on to our amendment No. 229, which is sandwiched neatly between amendments Nos. 149, 150 and 159, which were tabled by the Liberal Democrats. I hope that it is fairly clear, and its intention is to remove subsection (1), which states:
“Where it appears to the Secretary of State that a person on whom a requirement may be imposed under this section may have information in his possession which could be used for verifying”.
It is followed by paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) and continues
“the Secretary of State may require that person to provide him with the information.”
Amendment No. 229 is similar. It would remove the subsection that, instead of referring to the Secretary of State, refers to a designated documents authority and states that
“a person on whom a requirement may be imposed under this section may have information in his possession which could be used for verifying ... the authority may require that person to provide it with the information.”
Subsections (1) and (2) are remarkably wide and vague. For example, subsection (1) refers to
“something recorded in the Register ... something provided to the Secretary of State or a designated documents authority ... something otherwise available to the Secretary of State”,
while subsection (2) refers to
“something that is recorded in the Register ... something that has been provided to that authority”.
Under clause 43, entitled “General interpretation”, a
“‘designated document’ means a document of a description designated for the purposes of this Act”
and a
“‘designated documents authority’ means a person with the power or duty to issue a designated document”.
What does that mean? Does it mean a police authority, when issuing a shotgun certificate? What else might become involved? Will issuing television licences be covered by the provision? Subsections (1) and (2) provide little that is helpful to us. If we were to strike them out and go straight to subsection (3), which states, under the clause heading
“Power to require information for validating Register”,
that
“It shall be the duty of a person who—
(a)is required to provide information under this section, and
(b)has the information in his possession,
to comply with the requirement within whatever period is specified in the requirement.”
That will be enough.
Subsections (1) and (2) add nothing to the provision. If anything, they obscure it. If we struck them out, we would do ourselves a favour and make the Bill much clearer. It would also be shorter, and if we had more of subsection (3) we would be in a better position to understand it, and phrases such as “something that” would not be in the clause.