Proceeding contribution from Huw Irranca-Davies (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
My hon. Friend rightly described himself as flexible, so I put the following point to my honourable, flexible Friend. The 28 and 90-day periods have been discussed at great length in public and behind the scenes. The argument for a 90-day period is based on certain evidence put forward by the police, but some of us are struggling to understand in what way the 28-day period is scientifically accurate. Many Members are worried that establishing a 28-day period following discussions in the House today will not give the police and the intelligence services the flexibility that they need.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 438 c907
- 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 15:59:22 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_273606
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_273606
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_273606