---

Terrorism Bill

I support the amendments spoken to by the noble Lord, Lord Kingsland. I have a few concerns about them in detail, because, in the case of certain offences—for example, acts preparatory to terrorism under Clause 5, or providing or receiving training under Clause 6—it may well be that one would want to have some weapon against somebody who subsequently arrived in this country and there was reason to believe that they were here for nefarious purposes. However, the principle is right. Of course, it could be that people would be liable to prosecution under Clause 17, at least in theory, even if what they had done had been done many years previously. I accept it could not be retrospective to the enactment of this Bill. It could thereafter, however, go back a long way and expose people to prosecution for acts which had occurred many years ago and had no relevance whatever to their presence in the United Kingdom. So while I am not sure that this is the most appropriate form of words for it to take, it raises an issue requiring serious consideration.