---

Terrorism Bill

I find myself once again in the unusual position where the noble Lord, Lord Goodhart, is suggesting that a provision should be widened rather than narrowed. It is indeed an unusual sensation to be saying to the noble Lord that we feel that the current tightness of our provision is more accurate because it targets those whom we think should be captured, and we do not believe that it should be extended in the way the noble Lord seeks. The offence in Clause 1 will allow us to comply with Article 5. I have made it clear that that is what we intend and want to do. We do not want to go wider than that. The provision is drafted for that purpose. The language is accurate, and the suggested amendment would be less clear than the current drafting. Amendment No. 5 would widen the offence in ways that we in the Government do not regard as necessary. Instead of restricting the offence to persons who publish statements which encourage terrorism or to persons who cause others to publish such statements on their behalf, the offence would also apply to persons who cause others to publish such statements but on behalf of third parties. I am terribly interested in what the noble Lord is suggesting, because it is contrary to everything else that he has suggested. The amendment means that he would like to widen this provision and I do not believe that that is necessary. The Government would like to keep it as narrow as possible and necessary. We think that it is narrow enough as it is and we do not particularly want to widen it to catch any more people, although I thank the noble Lord for his invitation.