Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Falkner of Margravine (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 21 October 2008. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Counter-Terrorism Bill.


Counter-Terrorism Bill

I am grateful to other noble Lords who have supported the amendment. I am disappointed that the Minister feels that no further clarification or tightening is needed, particularly in light of the examples that he gave, because they were precisely the kind of examples that we were concerned about in the first place; for instance, information that is published in newsletters of groups or communicated in writing—I was thinking not necessarily of journalists, but of more innocent groups and organisations that might, for example, have someone from the armed services come to speak at a social function. Before I withdraw the amendment, may I ask the Minister whether he believes that another form of words to express the same levels of intent would be satisfactory or whether he just believes that the clause as it stands under Section 58 is adequate?


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
704 c1073 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Disclosure of information Armed forces Assets Coroners Juries Evidence Intelligence services Human rights Genocide National security Powers of entry Racially aggravated offences Terrorism Surveillance Religion Trials Right of search Anti-terrorism control orders Freezing of assets
Legislation
Counter-terrorism Bill 2007-08
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk