Proceeding contribution from Charles Clarke (Labour) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 26 October 2005. It occurred during Debate on bill on Terrorism Bill.
Terrorism Bill
In general, I respect my hon. Friend’s contribution to the debate, including the article that he recently published, but I do not respect his argument about the approach of the police. They were not throwing dice; they do not approach the matter in a gambling way; they are not trying to put forward some hazard. They are trying to make a serious assessment while legislation is being considered in the House of the time that they are likely to need in certain extreme circumstances. They may be right or wrong and people may reach a view as to whether they have made their case well, but it is nothing to do with gambling. The reason why a small number of cases have not exceeded 14 days is precisely because of the 14-day requirement.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 438 c343
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Disclosure of information Criminal investigation Confiscation orders Chemical weapons Intelligence services Incitement Police Organised crime Powers Nuclear weapons Proscribed organisations Sentencing Terrorism Stop and search Training Right of search Sequestration of assets Interception warrants Encouragement of terrorism
- Legislation
- Terrorism Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-09-24 15:57:16 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_270087
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_270087
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_270087