Proceeding contribution from John Denham (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
Although such an attack is clearly terrorist and would be defined as such in the 2000 Act, the point is that we are considering new laws that we never thought it necessary to introduce when we faced the PIRA attacks. That is why we need to look at the definition of terrorism that is appropriate to the new laws. My right hon. Friend is being very helpful, but I caution him that relying on retrospective events for the basis of the definition, when we did not think that these proposed laws were necessary at the time, is a rather dangerous line of argument.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 438 c1069
- 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 22:29:14 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_275599
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_275599
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_275599