Proceeding contribution from Dominic Grieve (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 9 November 2005. It occurred during Debate on bill on Terrorism Bill.
Terrorism Bill
I am interested in the Minister’s endorsement of the words of the hon. Member for Crewe and Nantwich (Mrs. Dunwoody), as she has just provided a let-out for every person who wants to incite terrorism. If all that is required to get around the clause is to preface one’s remarks with that saving clause, why are we passing clause 1 into law? That is a classic illustration of the muddled thinking behind the Government’s approach. The Government should remove glorification and stick to incitement, with proper terminology. They will then have an offence that works, that bites and, moreover, commands widespread respect.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 439 c429-30;439 c430
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Civil liberties Criminal proceedings Codes of practice Appeals Detainees Applications Arrests Evidence Incitement Judges National security Prosecutions Police custody Terrorism Remand in custody Cryptography High Court Habeas corpus Encouragement of terrorism Sunset clauses
- Legislation
- Terrorism Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-09-24 16:00:34 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_272727
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_272727
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_272727