Proceeding contribution from Alex Salmond (Scottish National Party) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 2 November 2005. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Terrorism Bill.
Terrorism Bill
The hon. Gentleman is making a very good speech. Does he understand why the phraseology in subsection (3) of clause 1 is that the public ““will understand a statement”” whereas in paragraph (b) of subsection (1) it is that the public ““are likely”” to understand a statement? As the hon. Gentleman made a lot of money from such distinctions in a previous life, does he have any idea why the Bill is not even internally consistent?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 438 c836
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Criminal investigation Detainees Evidence Incitement Judges Police Powers Prosecutions Public interest Police custody Negligence Terrorism Training Remand in custody 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 15:58:39 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_273402
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_273402
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_273402