Identity Cards Bill

My Lords, I shall end on the Parliament Act and the power of this House to say no. Last time, the noble Baroness, Lady Anelay of St Johns, quoted Wakeham, which sent me back to a document that we greatly underestimated on its publication. I am glad that she drew our attention to it. Perhaps I may quote from it at greater length:"““We take the general view that even the limited powers””—" the power to say no—"““to refer issues back for consideration or to impose a delay could, if exercised with restraint and only when occasion clearly demanded it, have a substantial political impact. If a reformed second chamber””—" and we are a reformed second Chamber—"““were to express concern about a particular Government proposal and exercise whatever powers of delay or referral were available, that would lead to (renewed) public and media interest in the issue, with opportunities for the concerns to be set out. It would force the Government to reconsider the issues in light of that interest, and it would give members of the House of Commons an opportunity to revisit the issues and make the final determination in the light of all relevant information. The Government of the day would have to take such powers and their consequences into account in drafting its legislation in the first place as well as seeking to put it on the statute book””." That is my argument. The government of the day cannot come to the Dispatch Box at a late stage and say, ““Whoops, sorry, it was infelicitously drafted””.