Later on today, Monday 13th March 2006, the Government will try to overturn the one remaining current point of disagreement between it and the House of Lords, over the controversial Identity Cards Bill 2005.
On Consideration of Lords Reasons for insisting on Amendments
Lords Amendments Nos. 16 and 22
Mr Secretary Clarke
To move, That this House insists on its disagreement with the Lords in their Amendments 16 and 22 but proposes the following Amendment in lieu:—
Page 4, line 45, after 'include', insert ', or be accompanied by'.
This clearly sets out to reverse the Lords insistance on decuipling the Passport applications or renewals from registration on the National Identity Register, during the allegedly voluntary phase of the scheme, thereby actually fulfilling the wording of the Labour party manifesto at the last General Election., which promised an initially voluntary scheme, rather, than the "compulsion by stealth" scheme which the Government wants to introduce.
What the "Page 4, line 45" Amendment in lieu, actually means is obscure, as it appears to be nonsense according to the online version of the text of the Bill, where Page 4 line 45 reads as:
e) any other person who carries out functions conferred by or under any enactment that fall to be carried out on behalf of the Crown.
Presumably it refers to a different printed versuoion somewhere.
According to ePolitix:
"But in a Commons vote today MPs are expected to reintroduce the clause - sending the amended legislation back to the House of Lords on Wednesday.
As tensions grow between both Houses, ministers are letting it be known that a failure to agree on the legislation could seriously delay the introduction of the ID cards system.
But opinion in the upper house appears to be stiffening against the measures, with a possible constitutional clash looming.
Home Secretary Charles Clarke has signalled to colleagues that he is prepared to engage in parliamentary ping pong until the early hours of Thursday morning should the Lords continue to oppose the measures.
Peers, however, insist the measure amounts to "compulsion by stealth" and appear set to dig in against the government."
Has the cross party NO2ID Campaign been able to influence enough Members of Parliament and Lords to stand up to the Government bullying over this still badly draughted, and in parts, unworkable Bill ?