Proceeding contribution from Paul Goggins (Labour) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 3 November 2005. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Terrorism Bill.
Terrorism Bill
The hon. Member for Beaconsfield (Mr. Grieve) may be more familiar than me with the precise wording, but there would have to be substantial entry beyond the fence. That is clear. My understanding is that the individuals concerned would physically have to go beyond the fence; in that sense there would need to be substantial entry to the site. In fact, the amendments are intended to be helpful and to clarify where people would not be committing an offence, whereas if we left the Bill as it is, they would be committing an offence even if they stood outside the perimeter fence and were on a licensed site.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 438 c1028-9
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Criminal investigation Asylum Companies Directors Liability Incitement International law Nuclear weapons Protest Proscribed organisations Radioactive materials Terrorism Training Trespass Encouragement of terrorism
- Legislation
- Terrorism Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 22:44:40 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_275466
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_275466
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_275466