Proceeding contribution from Mary Creagh (Labour) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 10 November 2005. It occurred during Debate on bill on Terrorism Bill.
Terrorism Bill
The hon. Gentleman says that Lord Carlile’s report was on something else, but I was referring to his report on the Bill, in which he discusses clause 22. He also describes his own inquiries and processes as an independent reviewer. He is the person whom the House has charged with reviewing the Terrorism Bill. Why is his opinion not important, and why does the hon. Gentleman think that he and his party are in a better position than the independent reviewer appointed by the Government to review the Bill? Do the Opposition somehow have a greater understanding of the police and the processes involved in the case? On the 90-day point, will he support a move to the investigative magistrate model, which is in place in other European countries? Does he not agree that if there is any chance of mass-casualty terrorism, certain people should not walk our streets?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 439 c507
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Disclosure of information Criminal investigation Detainees Arrests Chemical weapons Custodial treatment Evidence Intelligence services Incitement National security Police Powers Prosecutions Nuclear weapons Police custody Publications Police interrogation Terrorism Training Timetables 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 16:01:20 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_275693
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_275693
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_275693