Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Richard Burden (Labour) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 15 February 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Terrorism Bill 2005-06.


Terrorism Bill

The hon. Gentleman makes a good point, which he also made in one of our earlier debates on this subject, perhaps from his own experience. It is a relevant example. I want to make an appeal to the House. There will be a Division and I intend to abstain for the reasons that I have set out, but if we are concerned about the signals that we send from this place it is important that the Opposition and my hon. Friends who share my reservations about what the Government are doing, and indeed those who disagree even more strongly, do not over-egg their case and claim that the Bill contains something that is not there—in other words, go back to our previous debates and imply an omission of the need for a link between glorification and incitement. I ask my right hon. and hon. Friends—especially Ministers—who support the Government not to project the debate as an argument between people who want to defeat terrorism and people who do not. The argument is about how we do it, and that is the signal that we must send out.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
442 c1464 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Civil liberties Incitement International cooperation Judges Internet Ethnic groups History Freedom of expression Police Powers Muslims Terrorism Training Encouragement of terrorism
Legislation
Terrorism Bill 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk