My Lords, several questions have been raised. It is indeed the case that the contract with Experian was inserted in this Bill. We are transposing it, as it was negotiated by the previous Government. I do not think that it is contrary at all to the public interest, as it is a very reputable agency and, without doubt, it provides up-to-date and accurate information in a way that financial credit rating agencies are liable to have that information, which may be less up to date in departments of Government or other organisations.
Other points were raised about the power of the Secretary of State or, "““any other person specified for the purposes of this section by an order made by the Secretary of State””."
That should be related to the question of how such orders can be made, under Clause 11, of which subsection (3) states that it has to be by affirmative order. So there would indeed be opportunity for debate. I do not think that this power could conceivably be exercised on an arbitrary or unaccountable basis.
Identity Documents Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Neville-Jones
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 3 November 2010.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee proceeding on Identity Documents Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
721 c52GC 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 20:54:28 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_676739
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_676739
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_676739