Parliamentary Search

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Ramsay of Cartvale (Labour) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 13 December 2005. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Terrorism Bill.

Terrorism Bill

I thank the noble Lord for giving way. That evidence is not convincing enough. It is not enough to say that because intercept evidence is not admissible in courts, lots of prosecutions are not taking place. One of the problems for those of us who understand intercept material, have seen it, handled it and know what it is like, is, as I said in my speech, that it is usually not of an evidential nature. It is usually for current intelligence purposes. I cannot understand why the noble Lord, Lord Kingsland, cannot accept the word of Sir Swinton Thomas, who is privy to all the material as well as being a distinguished lawyer. If he comes to the conclusion that it would be harmful to our general national interests to allow this evidence, why is that not acceptable?

Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
676 c1232 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Disclosure of information Civil liberties Admissibility of evidence Criminal proceedings Codes of practice Appeals Administration of justice Detainees Crimes against property Communication Electronic surveillance Evidence Intelligence services Judges Police Prosecutions Proscribed organisations Police custody Politics and government Scotland Terrorism Remand in custody Time limits Telephone tapping Cryptography Sunset clauses
Legislation
Terrorism Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk