Proceeding contribution from Dominic Grieve (Conservative) 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
I understand my hon. Friend’s point, but the amendment covers ““a specific terrorist act””. If the Bill provided for a requirement to show that the person making the speech wished for the blowing up of the Houses of Parliament on the evening of 5 November, conviction would be unlikely unless the person said, ““And everybody should go and blow up the Houses of Parliament on the evening of 5 November.”” I therefore accept that the Government are entitled to introduce a measure that provides for general incitement—for example, a speech that requires every right-thinking person to consider whether to become a suicide bomber and thus force the British Government to change their policies. However, that is sufficient and there is no need to show that a specific incident or offence is about to be committed. That is the reason for paragraph (c) in the amendment.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 438 c838
- 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 15:58:53 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_273411
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_273411
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_273411