Proceeding contribution from Baroness Scotland of Asthal (Labour) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 20 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, but I hope that he will appreciate that, if someone has acquired certain assets, we cannot deprive them of those assets simply because they happen to have a nationality with which we have concerns. That, frankly, would be intolerable. I remind noble Lords that under Section 1(4)(c) restrictions can be imposed in respect of business. That is under the control order. The Terrorism (United Nations Measures) Order 2001 gives effect to the UN resolution of 28 September and provides the Treasury with the power to direct that funds are not made available to any person specified under that order. Asset freezing is an essential element in measures countering the financing of terrorism, by denying terrorists and their financers access to funds across the world. I can only assume that one of the concerns is that not only may this person have financially infiltrated the system and therefore have assets, but he could also use those assets in a way that might be detrimental and to the disadvantage of this country. We have done a great deal of this work since 11 September 2001; 44 accounts have been frozen in the United Kingdom, and a total of 45 accounts are frozen by UK financial institutions. These add up to a substantial package of measures, which can be taken to ensure that those who are serious security concerns are dealt with appropriately. In relation to proposed paragraphs (s) and (t), a control order cannot be used to try to uncover criminal activity. If we impose a control order on someone because his terrorist-related activities include, for example, facilitating terrorism through holding assets on trust for other terrorists, the control order itself would address this activity by restricting it. By contrast, if no activity is suspected or known about, it is difficult to see how an obligation could be necessary or proportionate for purposes connected with preventing or restricting involvement by that individual in terrorism-related activity. I thank the noble Baroness for giving me such a delightful opportunity to explore the issue in such depth. I hope that I have satisfied her that this is a matter that the Government are seized of and which is being dealt with appropriately.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 676 c1666
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Disclosure of information Intelligence services Greater London Jurisdiction Ethnic groups Ownership Police Powers Property Minority groups Terrorism Stop and search Security Sequestration of assets Anti-terrorism control orders Countries Freezing of assets
- Legislation
- Terrorism Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 20:09:20 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_288879
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_288879
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_288879