Proceeding contribution from Lord Kingsland (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 1 February 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Terrorism Bill.
Terrorism Bill
My Lords, in view of the scope and incisiveness of the analysis given by the noble Lord, Lord Goodhart, I can be extremely telegraphic. We share the noble Lord’s concern about the threat to freedom of speech posed by the power of constables to issue Clause 3 notices. As the noble Lord rightly said, there is no incentive for an Internet service provider to challenge the notice. The only control contained in the Bill is the words,"““in the opinion of the constable””." The noble Lord has explained graphically why that is a wholly inadequate protection of the principle of freedom of speech. He will have our support.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 678 c205-6
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Conduct ICT EU law Exemptions Libraries Internet Electronic commerce Journalism Protection Police Powers Prosecutions Proscribed organisations Publications Terrorism Stop and search Training Encouragement of terrorism
- Legislation
- Terrorism Bill 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 11:09:20 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_296801
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_296801
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_296801