I will endeavour to answer those two points. As regards the question posed by the noble Countess, Lady Mar, the distinction depends on the individual application and on the ability of the Identity and Passport Service to determine which source of information is best suited to the application. This is therefore permissive, rather than demanding that every single source should be applied to and used.
As regards the question posed by the noble Lord, Lord Phillips, on judicial input, I think that what we are saying here is that a requirement to attend a magistrates’ court on every occasion when a person working for the IPS has a suspicion that there is a problem is impractical. We need to be able to ensure that there is an operational capability to deal with suspected offenders. The provision as it stands replicates the power and ability that exist in the Data Protection Act, which also provides safeguards.
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 c54GC 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand Committee
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 20:54:34 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_676749
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_676749
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_676749