Skip to main content

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


Counter-Terrorism Bill

I entirely agree with my hon. Friend that we need to discuss this in a rational way, and I shall be giving her an alternative, my amendment (a), which I hope she can support. It answers the point. The Government pray in aid a variety of plots and trials, but they have all been dealt with under the existing arrangements satisfactorily and effectively. The Dhiren Barot case has been trotted out again, but that was dealt with under the 14-day rule. That was one of the cases that they used in the argument for 90 days, which led to the compromise of 28 days, so that is an old argument that was dealt with two years ago. The parliamentary Labour party briefing refers to eight other plots, which were all dealt with under the 14-day rule, except the alleged airline plot, which was dealt with under the 28-day provisions. There is no evidence of anyone having been released when they not should not have been. The 28-day power has not been used for a year, and it has hardly been used at all. Yet, this new power is being sought on spec for what we are told are future extreme cases.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
477 c356-7 
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