Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Elton (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 7 December 2005. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Terrorism Bill.


Terrorism Bill

moved Amendment No. 96:"Page 16, line 17, after second ““in”” insert ““section 1 of””" The noble Lord said: In speaking to Amendment No. 96 I shall speak also to Amendments Nos. 97, 108, 109, 137, 138, 140 and 141. All these amendments embody what to me is a new formulation. It may simply be that I have not been involved in legislation for a while and a new style has developed. However, it seems to me an unsatisfactory style. We are referred to the whole of another Act of Parliament for a meaning and then asked to look at one provision in it, rather than simply being referred to that section as would be normal. What I propose, therefore, is to revert to the normal—saying that the meaning of the term in this Act is the same as in a given section of another Act, and no reference to the rest of the Act to be read through to see if that holds good throughout. I beg to move.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
676 c726 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Disclosure of information Crimes of violence Crimes against property ICT Jurisdiction Incitement Fines Libraries Internet Journalism Police Prosecutions Publications Sentencing Universities Terrorism Training Research Students Academic freedom Propaganda Encouragement of terrorism
Legislation
Terrorism Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk