Proceeding contribution from Lord West of Spithead (Labour) 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 should make it clear that our preferred option with someone whom we suspect is a terrorist is always prosecution. If we cannot get a prosecution, because all we have is intelligence rather than pure evidence, we would go for deportation with assurances. This is the next case. Control orders are there to protect our citizens and only a very small number of them have ever been enacted. I understand why the noble Lords, Lord Lester and Lord Kingsland, approached this in a general sense, but it is probably not the way in which I should reply to the debate. I think I will have to go through these amendments in turn because clearly different lawyers have different views. The Government’s lawyers have drawn different inferences and conclusions from—
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 704 c1080-1
- 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
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-11-06 10:14:37 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_502275
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_502275
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_502275