Patrick Mercer (Shadow Minister (Homeland Security), (Assisted By Shadow Law Officers); Newark, Conservative)

I beg to move amendment No. 121, in clause 45, page 39, line 2, after “the”, insert “National Registration and”.

This is a very simple amendment. Clause 45 relates to the Bill’s title and to repeals, commencements, transitory provisions and so on. The Minister will be   aware that, throughout our many debates on this subject, we have petitioned for the title of the Bill to be changed. That is reflected in this amendment.

The most overused words in this debate have been modification and amendment. An anti-tank round that goes right to the heart of something is modified with little wings—thin stabilised things called canards. I suggest that this amendment is covered with canards, and that it goes right to the heart of this part of the Bill. As I am sure the Minister will agree, if we changed the title, it would improve things hugely and they would be much clearer for everyone. No doubt, such a change is deeply desirable.

Edward Garnier (Shadow Minister, (Assisted By Shadow Law Officers); Harborough, Conservative)

I agree with my hon. Friend, not for the first time. The suggestion that he makes would bring the clause in line with the long title of the Bill. The Bill is described as one to

“make provision for a national scheme of registration of individuals”.

That is the first thing that it is designed to do. The second thing it is designed to do is to make provision for “the issue of cards”. It is funny that the Bill should be described by its second purpose and not by its first. If it were to be described accurately, it would, as he suggests, be called the “National Registration and Identity Cards Bill”. This is not a flippant point, as it is important for the Government to describe the Bill accurately. I am sure they will wish to do so.

Tony McNulty (Minister of State (Immigration, Citizenship and Nationality), Home Office; Harrow East, Labour)

I take that not as a flippant point, but as a fair one. Nevertheless, I entirely disagree with it, which I am fully entitled to do. We are happy with the short title as it is. Identity cards are the key focal point for substantive public debate and for our own deliberations. I am surprised that the hon. Member for Newark did not come back with the notion of the flash-and-go Bill, which would have been just as useful for our deliberations.

As I have said time and again, the interaction between the register and the card is important, and the register is certainly an important feature of the overall scheme. None the less, the short title reflects the substance of the Bill, and we think that “Identity Cards Bill” just about covers it, so I resist the amendment in the nicest possible way.

Patrick Mercer (Shadow Minister (Homeland Security), (Assisted By Shadow Law Officers); Newark, Conservative)

I am grateful to the Minister for his explanation. It comes as no surprise that this, our last substantive amendment, should be resisted, although I regret that. However, in light of the amendment and how the Minister has dealt with it, I shall not press the matter, although I hope that it can be dealt with later. I beg to ask leave to withdraw the amendment.

Edward Garnier (Shadow Minister, (Assisted By Shadow Law Officers); Harborough, Conservative)

This is my last cry on the subject of modifications. Clause 45(6) states:

“Her Majesty may by Order in Council provide for provisions of this Act to extend with such modifications (if any) as She thinks fit to any of the Channel Islands or to the Isle of Man.”

That would be a modification of the Act, rather than one simply made through secondary legislation or to the scheme. I merely note that, and I trust that Her Majesty may see fit to pay particular attention to that aspect of the Bill.

Tony McNulty (Minister of State (Immigration, Citizenship and Nationality), Home Office; Harrow East, Labour)

The hon. and learned Gentleman has fallen at the last hurdle. The modification would be to the provisions provided for by the Act, not to the Act itself. Were they modifications to the Act, they would be amendments. With that in mind, I ask that clause 45 should stand part of the Bill.

Tony McNulty (Minister of State (Immigration, Citizenship and Nationality), Home Office; Harrow East, Labour)

I shall not detain the Committee for long, but I wish to say a few words before we conclude. On the whole, our deliberations have been fair. They have also, in the main, been good-humoured and temperate, although I have provided the odd exception to that. We have been excellently served by your chairmanship, Mr. Gale, and that of Mr. Hood, and I convey the Committee’s thanks to you both for the good-humoured and temperate way in which you chaired our proceedings.

Opposition Committee members were, I know, terribly underwhelmed by the programme motion, but after the order and the knives were introduced, our deliberations remained good-hearted, but picked up pace. We managed two clauses in our first four sittings and then, without any loss of our ability to scrutinise, we picked up the pace and deliberated on things in detail. I would argue that, without that motion and the knives, we would still be debating clause 3.

I take the point that clauses 1 and 2 were matters of substance. We have now ensured that almost all the 45 clauses and two schedules have been debated to the level of detail that the Committee requires. I said at the outset that we had had scrutiny and debate on these matters before, and I described this as déjà vu. Now that we have come to the end of the proceedings, it seems that that was not entirely fair; some matters raised by the hon. and learned Member for Harborough and by the hon. Members for Newark and for Orkney and Shetland were different from those raised when last the Committee met. We have had time to explore some elements and amendments, nay, modifications, more in this Committee than in the last.

I thank all the Opposition Front Benchers for the way in which they put the Bill to scrutiny. I also hope that the hon. Members for Lancaster and Wyre (Mr. Wallace) and for Bournemouth, East (Mr. Ellwood) enjoyed their first outing in Committee. For new Members, they contributed in exemplary fashion. I also congratulate the new Government Members who contributed.

Reverting to academic mode, if I were giving an early report on the new Liberal Democrat Member, the hon. Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale   (Tim Farron), I would say, “Could do better,” or something similar. Our deliberations are serious and not simply partisan rhetoric. That is a lesson that he will learn. In my early days in the council chamber in Harrow, I used to scream and shout. I do not do that any more, as people will know—at least not from the uninformed position that the hon. Gentleman illustrated, and which I illustrated during my first outings in the mid-1980s.

The debate has been fair, robust and detailed. For that, everyone is to be thanked. I also thank, not in passing but in substance, my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary, who had his first outing as such; for a Minister on a first outing on such a controversial Bill, he performed in exemplary fashion. Happily, he allowed me to carry out nature’s normal ablutions at various stages. Flying solo on a Bill is not nice, and it can mean having to engineer debates so that one can leave when necessary.

I demur from those who suggest scurrilously that I left the Room for nicotine intakes. You will know, Mr. Gale, that the Corridor outside this Room is non-smoking. I have not broken that ruling—and my nose is not growing in any way as I make these remarks.

I have written two letters to you, Mr. Gale, on points that needed greater elaboration. There may be more on the way. If I missed anything, I apologise. If hon. Members want to come back to us about points that I undertook to respond to but have not done so, I will happily respond.

We send the Bill back to the House suitably amended with one Government amendment, to clause 37. I am sure that my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary and I will have huge fun reflecting on all the things that Members have asked us to reflect on during the summer. We shall certainly reflect do so, and the Bill will be in better shape for it. We will return to our deliberations at some stage in October for Third Reading and Report.

On a serious note, the matter before us is one of fundamental import to public policy. I thank everyone for taking it seriously. We have had moments of levity, but we have also had moments of seriousness. It was all done in good humour, politely and with the courtesy that this place should command, and because of that good nature and the temperate way in which we dispatched our deliberations, we and the Bill are all the better for the experience. We will look back lovingly at that experience. I am sure that it will feature substantially in everyone’s memoirs, except perhaps those of the hon. Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale.

I commend the motion that you, Mr. Gale, should dispatch the Bill to the place downstairs that we love so much.

Edward Garnier (Shadow Minister, (Assisted By Shadow Law Officers); Harborough, Conservative)

The Minister’s valedictory remarks were notable for two things. First, they were almost longer than the deliberations on the Bill itself. Secondly, they gave us more information about him and his personal habits than about Government policy.

Nevertheless, I join the Minister in thanking you, Mr. Gale, and your co-Chairman, Mr. Hood. In particular, I thank the Clerk to the Committee, Dr. Benger, and his staff, for their help to the Opposition. It was given wholly apolitically on matters of procedure. I am grateful to the Clerk for that, as I know the Minister is.

Mr. McNultyindicated assent.

Edward Garnier (Shadow Minister, (Assisted By Shadow Law Officers); Harborough, Conservative)

I see the Minister nodding.

I also thank the Hansard reporters. Their work is often forgotten, but for politicians such as myself, who do not suffer from any form of vanity, it is occasionally nice to look back and see how marvellous and seamless our prose in Committee was. I am therefore very grateful to the Hansard reporters for reporting our proceedings.

I agree with the Minister that, although the matter before us is one of deep philosophical division between the main political parties, as well as the Liberal Democrats, we have managed to conduct our affairs with a degree of humour and without losing sight of the seriousness of the legislation.

A lot more needs to be said about the Bill, and a lot more will be said, both in the Chamber of the House of Commons and in another place. None the less, we have done the best that we can within the limits set down for us. I congratulate the two Ministers on their conduct of the Bill, although they might have to answer for it in due course. I congratulate the Government Back Benchers who have adorned the Committee with their silence and occasional interventions, and I also thank the hon. Member for Orkney and Shetland for assisting the Opposition in trying to resist the Government.

Finally, may I introduce a happy note, although it comes to mind because of a serious issue? My hon. Friend the Member for Bournemouth, East, who is not present today, first came into personal contact with terrorism as a result of the death of his brother in Bali. In the context of the Bill, one of the statutory purposes of the identity card register is to deal with terrorism. Happily, having come into the Committee with that connection, my hon. Friend is unable to be here today because he is getting married on Saturday. That my piece of joyful news for the Committee. I am sure that we all wish him well in what I hope will be a long and very happy married life.

It goes without saying—I shall say it none the less; what lawyer, whether or not a Member of Parliament, does not use 50 words when one might have done?—that I thank my hon. Friend the Member for Newark, who has been across this parade ground twice, but is still smiling and still has shiny boots. My hon. Friend the Member for Hertford and Stortford (Mr. Prisk) has kept us under control, and my hon. Friends the Members for Lancaster and Wyre and for Bournemouth, East have contributed valiantly and with great effect to our proceedings of past few weeks. With that, I look forward to resuming the debate on Report.

Alistair Carmichael (Shadow Minister, Home Affairs; Orkney & Shetland, Liberal Democrat)

Listening to the Minister and to the hon. and learned Member for Harborough thanking everybody without any possible exception, I was beginning to wonder whether I had fallen through some sort of time warp and turned up at the Oscar awards. The hon. and learned Member for Harborough should have thanked his mother, although we have heard so much about Opposition Members’ families that we probably have no need to hear any more.

I thank you, Mr. Gale, and Mr. Hood, and the officials from the Clerks Department and the Minister’s office for the very efficient way in which our proceedings have been conducted. I also thank the other Front Benchers, and the Minister in particular. I was warned by one of my hon. Friends that I would find the Minister difficult to deal with—the word “thug” might have been mentioned—but that has not been my experience. He has been a tremendous example of courtesy and good humour right up until the last, when he made his wholly unwarranted attack on my hon. Friend the Member for Westmorland and Lonsdale. I suspect that the hon. Friend who gave me the warning thinks that I am bit of a difficult character; perhaps that is what I have in common with the Minister.

We have nothing particular to be proud of in seeing the Bill through Committee, but we can derive some satisfaction from the manner in which we did it.

Roger Gale (North Thanet, Conservative)

As the past 15 minutes of our proceedings have been entirely out of order, I shall compound the problem.

I add my thanks to the Officers of the House, the police, the Clerks and the Hansard writers for all their work, without which our deliberations would be difficult if not impossible; their work is often unsung, but it is nevertheless greatly appreciated.

I thank all hon. Members for the courtesy and good humour with which the Committee has been conducted. It has been exemplary. I only wish that those outside the House, particularly on the Press Benches, would pay more attention to such deliberations, as it was noticeable during our proceedings that those Benches were largely empty. I also thank the new Members in the Committee for their participation; I hope that it has been an interesting, enjoyable and informative experience.

In the light of the usual summer calumnies published this morning by the tabloid press, I wish each and every member of the Committee the usual hard-working, tiresome and exhausting recess, in the knowledge that while the journalists will leave this building with their buckets and spades, Members’ postbags will continue to be dealt with throughout the summer. Should any Member have the opportunity to take a couple of weeks’ vacation, however, I trust that it will be enjoyable.