Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Robert Marshall-Andrews (Labour) 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 right. That is the horrendously, deliberately and expressly wide nature of this part of the Bill. Another example would be that of a proposer of a university debate—I think that I have also done this myself—speaking to the motion, ““This House would become a suicide bomber,”” and delivering, one hopes, a particularly cogent speech, not believing it for one minute or intending that it should happen, but knowing that there is a student audience out there that includes near-radicalised or semi-radicalised people who might listen to the words and be encouraged to commit terrorist acts as a result. That would be caught under the Act, without a shadow of a doubt. One would have to rely on the Director of Public Prosecutions to exercise his imprimatur to avoid it. A teacher or tutor distributing terrorist propaganda to a class studying history in the middle east would be caught under the Act without a shadow of a doubt.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
438 c846 
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