Proceeding contribution from John Bercow (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
My hon. Friend very shrewdly avoided the elephant trap that had been laid for him by the hon. Member for Wolverhampton, South-West (Rob Marris) and I hope that he will not now fall into an alternative trap. May I put it to him that it is not merely a question of safeguards or of the existence of a sunset clause, valuable though both those things can be, but of the evidential base, if such base there be, for an extension of time? It is not a matter of saying, ““Some people think two plus two is four, others think two plus two is six, so we will compromise on five.”” It must be a matter of principle, and the Government have not yet made a case, by providing examples, for any sort of extension. We cannot accept some sort of cobbled-together compromise in the name of a quiet life.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 438 c904
- 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 15:59:04 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_273593
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_273593
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_273593