---

20 Jun 2005 : Column 761W—continued

Hunting Act (Policing Costs)

Mr. Gordon Prentice: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what estimate he has made of the cost to date of policing the Hunting Act 2004. [3176]

Hazel Blears: The Association of Chief Police Officers informs me that this information has not been collected as a separate cost. It would therefore be very difficult to establish such costs from general policing costs in the countryside.

Identity Cards

Mr. Khan: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what the penalty will be for those unwilling to pay the £1,000 civil penalty for not obtaining an identity card. [4139]

 
20 Jun 2005 : Column 762W
 

Mr. McNulty: Clause 6 of the Identity Cards Bill enables the Secretary of State to make an order imposing an obligation on individuals of a specified description to be entered in the Register. An individual could only be required to register once Parliament has agreed via a super-affirmative" procedure to make registration compulsory. An individual who fails to register when required to do so under clause 6 will be liable to a civil penalty not exceeding £2,500.

Where an individual fails to satisfy his obligations under clause 6 subsections (2) and (3), he is liable for a further civil penalty not exceeding £2,500 in respect of each time the Secretary of State gives him notice requiring him to make an application and he fails to do so before the set deadline.

The Secretary of State must issue a code of practice setting out the matters that he will consider when determining the amount to be imposed by way of a civil penalty and before issuing the code, the Secretary of State must lay a draft of it before Parliament.

The Secretary of State must have regard to the code when imposing a civil penalty or considering a notice of objection under clause 34.

Clause 33 of the Bill sets out the requirements that apply to the Secretary of State when imposing a notice of a civil penalty. A person may object to the Secretary of State about the imposition of the civil penalty on the grounds that: he is not liable for it, that the circumstances of the contravention make the imposition of the penalty unreasonable or that the amount of the penalty is too high. This is set out in clause 34 of the Bill. A person may also appeal against the imposition of a civil penalty, as set out on clause 35 of the Bill, to the county court in England, Wales or Northern Ireland or to the Sheriff in Scotland.

In the case of non-payment of a civil penalty the Secretary of State will enforce the debt through the civil courts.

Ms Butler: To ask the Secretary of State for the HomeDepartment what the penalties will be for UK residents who refuse to register for the proposed identity card. [4414]

Mr. McNulty: An individual who refused to comply with the registration requirements when applying for a document designated under clause 4 of the Identity Cards Bill (such as a passport) would not be issued with the designated document.

Clause 6 of the Identity Cards Bill enables the Secretary of State to make an order imposing an obligation on individuals of a specified description to be entered in the Register. An individual could only be required to register once Parliament has agreed via a super-affirmative" procedure to make registration compulsory. An individual who fails to register when required to do so under clause six will be liable to a civil penalty not exceeding £2,500.

Where an individual fails to satisfy his obligations under clause 6 subsections (2) and (3), he is liable for a further civil penalty not exceeding £2,500 in respect of each time the Secretary of State gives him notice requiring him to make an application and he fails to do so before the set deadline.
 
20 Jun 2005 : Column 763W
 

The Secretary of State must issue a code of practice setting out the matters that he will consider when determining the amount to be imposed by way of a civil penalty and before issuing the code, the Secretary of State must lay a draft of it before Parliament. The Secretary of State must have regard to the code when imposing a civil penalty or considering a notice of objection under clause 34.

Clause 33 of the Bill sets out the requirements that apply to the Secretary of State when imposing a notice of a civil penalty. A person may object to the Secretary of State about the imposition of the civil penalty on the grounds that: he is not liable for it, that the circumstances of the contravention make the imposition of the penalty unreasonable or that the amount of the penalty is too high. This is set out in clause 34 of the Bill. A person may also appeal against the imposition of a civil penalty, as set out on clause 35 of the Bill, to the county court in England, Wales or Northern Ireland or to the Sheriff in Scotland.

In the case of non-payment of a civil penalty the Secretary of State will enforce the debt through the civil courts.

Mr. Khan: To ask the Secretary of State for the HomeDepartment what assessment he has made of the likely effects of identity cards on vulnerable groups in society. [4133]

Mr. McNulty: We are taking close consideration of the needs of vulnerable groups in designing the requirements for the identity cards system.

The Special Issues ID cards research conducted at the end of 2004 and the United Kingdom Passport Service biometric enrolment trial published in May 2005 have consulted a range of faith, race and nationality groups as well as stakeholders representing people with disabilities and disadvantaged groups (for example organisations representing blind people, deaf people, the elderly and physically and mentally disabled, transgender groups, Gypsies or the homeless).

Consultations with groups representing more vulnerable groups in society will continue to ensure that their requirements are fed into the design of the scheme.

Mr. Khan: To ask the Secretary of State for the HomeDepartment whether there are plans to include (a) DNA and (b) medical records on the National Identity Register in the second stage of the identity cards process. [4172]

Mr. McNulty: The Identity Cards Scheme is not proposing to use DNA as one of the biometric identifiers. Clause 43 of the Identity Cards Bill defines biometric information as data about a person's external characteristics, e.g. facial image, iris pattern or fingerprints and therefore excludes DNA. DNA is not included in the list of information at Schedule one of the Identity Cards Bill that may be held on the National Identity Register and there is no power under Clause five of the Bill (applications relating to entries in the Register) for the Secretary of State to require a person to provide a DNA sample.

The Identity Cards Scheme is not proposing to include medical records on the National Identity Register. Clause one and Schedule one of the Identity
 
20 Jun 2005 : Column 764W
 
Cards Bill sets out what information could be held on the Register. In general the storage of medical information on the Register would not be allowed by the Bill as medical information does not fall within the definition of registerable facts as set out in Clause 1(5) of the Bill.

The Bill does allow for the storage of voluntary information with the consent of both the person who is registered and the Secretary of State.

Mr. Hancock: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department what provisions for financially disadvantaged individuals will be made to offset the cost of the proposed identification cards. [4525]

Mr. McNulty: The Identity Cards Bill gives the Secretary of State the power to set fees to cover the costs of the scheme, subject to Parliament's consent. This is set out in clause 37 of the Bill. No decisions have yet been made on the fee schedule or concessionary fees and the final say will rest with Parliament.

Harry Cohen: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether consent in the proposed Identity Card Bill will be defined by reference to Directive 95/46/EC. [4577]

Mr. McNulty: Clause 14 of the Identity Cards Bill as introduced into Parliament on 25 May 2005 contains provisions relating to situations in which a card-holder authorises, or otherwise consents to, a service provider's checking the national identity register against his identity card. The clause restricts the information which may be provided to a subset of information confirming identity. Clause 14 does not define consent as it is a commonly used and understood term.

Harry Cohen: To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department if he will make a statement on the access that the police, security services and tax officials will be given to any national register established under legislation on identity cards. [4578]

Mr. McNulty: Other than properly authorised staff involved in the administration of the scheme no individual or organisation will have direct access to the National Identity Register itself.

Instead they will be allowed to verify information, or in certain circumstances, be able to obtain some information from the Register through the proposed agency. However, information from the Register can only be provided if specifically authorised by or under the powers in the Identity Cards Bill.

In the case of police, security services and tax officials, this can occur both with consent, as outlined in Clause 14 in the Identity Cards Bill and also without cardholder consent as long as it is within terms of Clauses 19–23.

Powers to provide information without consent in Clauses 19–23 are strictly limited. Information may be disclosed without consent to Security and Intelligence Agencies for the purposes of carrying out their functions.

The Police and the Commissioners of Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs may also be provided with information held on the scheme but the type of information and the circumstances in which it may be provided are limited by Clauses 19(3), 19(4) and 20(4).
 
20 Jun 2005 : Column 765W
 
Clause 20(4) in particular limits the provision of information on when a person's record on the Register has been checked to purposes connected with the prevention and detection of serious crime.

The Bill ensures that provision of information without consent will be properly regulated and subject to independent oversight. Unauthorised disclosure of information from the Register is a criminal offence under Clause 29 of the Bill.

---