Proceeding contribution from John Hayes (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 10 June 2009. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Geneva Conventions and United Nations Personnel (Protocols) Bill [Lords].
Geneva Conventions and United Nations Personnel (Protocols) Bill [Lords]
The Minister will be delighted to know that this will be my final intervention, but clause 2 deals with the optional protocol that extends the convention's authority to deal with humanitarian aid. However, as the right hon. Member for Pontypridd (Dr. Howells) suggested, it brings us back to the issue of protection, and to signs and symbols. Will the Minister buttonhole this once and for all? Surely a sign has a strictly limited meaning but a symbol, as Jung argued, is far more subtle. When we use a symbol, we imply or suggest all that lies behind it. Does the Minister agree that, when it comes to protection, that is critical? He is well qualified to answer that, as he is Jung at heart.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 493 c848
- Session
- 2008-09
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Health services Humanitarian aid Geneva Conventions International organisations Peacekeeping operations Staff United Nations Safety International Red Cross
- Legislation
- Geneva Conventions and United Nations Personnel (Protocols) Bill (HL) 2008-09
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 11:55:43 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_565273
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_565273
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_565273