Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Smith of Malvern (Labour) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 11 June 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill on Counter-Terrorism Bill.


Counter-Terrorism Bill

That is why the definition that we have set down requires serious loss of life or serious impact on human welfare, and it is that arm of the definition that is qualified by the list beneath it or serious threat to national security. I am willing to discuss this at further length with my hon. Friend and others, and I have no doubt that it will be scrutinised in detail when the Bill arrives in the House of Lords, but our intention in proposing the definition was precisely to limit the circumstances in which it will be possible to use the power. I hope that my hon. Friend accepts that that was the intention. It was also the reason why, in a spirit of developing consensus, we looked extremely closely at the wording in the Civil Contingencies Act, and built our definition on that. It is stronger than what we originally proposed, and I believe that it will tightly define the circumstances in which the power can be used. Of course that will quite rightly be subject to further scrutiny, not only today but when the Bill reaches the House of Lords.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
477 c327 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Compensation Civil liberties Crime prevention Criminal investigation Bail Administration of justice Detainees Evidence Police Parliamentary scrutiny Terrorism Security Habeas corpus
Legislation
Counter-terrorism Bill 2007-08
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk