The Committee, which considers whether draft laws will have
unexpected or ill-advised consequences for the constitution, warns
that the Identity Cards Bill seeks to create a database that will
record more information about every adult in the
UK
than has ever been placed on a single database before.
Such is the significance of the database to the Government
proposals that the Committee suggests that the Bill should more
properly be known as the "National Identity Register and Identity
Cards Bill".
"Such a scheme may have the benefits that are claimed for it,
but the existence of this extensive new database in the hands of
the State makes abuse of privacy possible," says the report.
The report suggests various methods by which privacy concerns
may be lessened, stressing that the information contained on the
Register should not be regarded as the "property" of the Home
Secretary.
Fundamentally, says the report, the Home Secretary should not
be responsible for the development, operation and maintenance of
the scheme, but should be responsible only for the development of
the proposals and the regulations within which it will
operate.
An expert advisory or consultative committee should be set up
to assist with this.
An independent Registrar, reporting directly to Parliament,
should be created to oversee the maintenance of the Register, says
the report, which compares the possible independence of the
Registrar to that currently enjoyed by Customs and Excise and the
Inland Revenue.
Operation of the scheme should be overseen by the proposed
National Identity Scheme Commissioner, as set out in the current
proposals, according to the Committee.
However, it expresses concern over the lack of provision in
the Bill for the independence of the Commissioner from the
Secretary of State, or the empowerment of the Commissioner to deal
with complaints from individuals concerned about the Secretary of
State's handling of their cases.
Accordingly the Committee suggests that the Commissioner
should be independent, his powers increased and that he should be
empowered to report directly to Parliament – rather than to the
Secretary of State, as is currently proposed.
Finally, on the question of timing, the report suggests that
Ministers should not try to provide in the current proposals for
the future extension of the scheme from a voluntary one to a
mandatory one.
At present the draft leaves Ministers with the power to enact
the "compulsory" aspects of the Bill through a "super-affirmative"
procedure, but does not detail the date on which the Government is
likely to create the necessary legislation.
Ministers have said in the past that this is likely to be in
2012 or 2013 and that the legislation will be pushed through once a
critical mass of the people have voluntarily received identity
cards.
The Committee suggests there is no urgent need to provide for
this now and that the Bill should be limited only to the
introduction of the voluntary stage of the scheme, on the grounds
that later legislation will better reflect the inevitable practical
changes that experience of such a scheme will bring.
This is especially important, concludes the report, as "these
measures reflect a significant change in the constitutional
relationship between the State and the individual". In these
circumstances, "the change to a universal and compulsory scheme
should not be brought about by secondary legislation, even by a
"super-affirmative" procedure".
The report follows in the wake of two earlier Parliamentary
Committee reports critical of the Government proposals; one by the
Home Affairs Select Committee of the House of Commons and the other
by the Joint Committee on Human Rights.
