division_name: Identity Cards Bill
motion: <p class="" pid="b.181.2/1" pwmotiontext="yes">I beg to move, That this House does not insist on its Amendments 22E and 22F but disagrees with the Lords in their Amendments 22G and 22H.</p>
  
  <p class="" pid="b.181.2/2" pwmotiontext="yes">I should say, first, that I am very pleased that their lordships have now dropped their outright opposition to the designation power in the Bill by dropping their previous amendments Nos. 16 and 22. That is very good news and an important development. However, the amendments in lieu are not a real compromise as they would simply delay the power to link the issue of identity cards to designated documents, such as passports, until 2012. That is unacceptable and it would not be right to allow the other place to delay the implementation of legislation that it dislikes until five years have passed. That is a deliberate plan for delay and destruction of the process in the Identity Cards Bill.</p>
  
  <p pid="b.197.5/1" pwmotiontext="yes"><i>The House having divided:</i> Ayes 284, Noes 241.</p>