---

Terrorism Bill

I thought that the provision was a model of concision. The amendment seeks to change the definition of a statement within the changes that Clause 21 makes to Section 3 of the Terrorism Act 2000. Currently, the definition we have provided states that a statement,"““includes a communication without words consisting of sounds or images or both””." The noble Lord might be familiar with that if he followed, in quite the same detail as some of his noble friends, the Electronic Communications Act 2000, which makes it clear that a statement can include video and sounds without words, as well as statements of a more traditional nature. I leave him to imagine what such statements might be. The amendment makes it explicit that letters and   numerals are included in the definition. The Government are always happy to look at whether their drafting can be improved, but in this instance I am not sure quite what the amendment seeks to add. We have made clear that a statement that is defined as,"““an expression of something in a speech or writing””" includes communications without words consisting of sounds or images or both, which we thought would put that matter beyond doubt. The Oxford English Dictionary defines images as,"““a representation of the external form of a person or thing””." We believe that must include numerals and letters. I am grateful to the noble Lord for giving us the opportunity to explain that, but I hope that this time my explanation will enable him to withdraw his amendment with greater pleasure.