Immigration Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateDepartment: Department for International Development
Lord Marlesford
Main Page: Lord Marlesford (Conservative - Life peer)Department Debates - View all Lord Marlesford's debates with the Department for International Development
Immigration
Lord Marlesford Excerpts(6 years ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Marlesford (Con)
My Lords, I have one question for my noble friend. In the Statement a crucial sentence states that,
“the provision of DNA evidence must be entirely voluntary”.
Why is that? Is DNA evidence not used for paternity cases and for other medical reasons? Is it not used in criminal investigations? What is the difference in principle between DNA and fingerprints or eye recognition? Surely, any means, when the country needs to know who somebody is, is perfectly legitimate.
Baroness Williams of Trafford
I thank my noble friend for that question. I am referring, and the Statement referred, purely to the immigration system. He is absolutely right that biometrics cover a number of areas, as he said, including fingerprints and iris recognition—but in this context DNA presentation should be entirely voluntary.