Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Hazel Blears (Labour) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 9 November 2005. It occurred during Debate on bill on Terrorism Bill.


Terrorism Bill

What should be criminal is the indirect incitement and the encouragement of people to commit acts of terrorism. Clearly, when we come to the other clauses—we may not have a chance to debate them—I want to deal with the points about extra-territorial jurisdiction made by the right hon. and learned Member for Rushcliffe (Mr. Clarke) and the right hon. Member for Suffolk, Coastal (Mr. Gummer). Again, with some of the amendments that we have introduced, we have tried to narrow the scope of those offences to try to reassure hon. Members that they are targeted at the specific mischief. However, if the hon. Member for Buckingham (John Bercow) is asking whether I can pick and choose between regimes or perhaps between a good terrorist and a bad terrorist, I repeat that it is wrong for people to encourage others to undertake terrorist acts. As I have said, it is a slippery slope—


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
439 c432 
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