Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Scotland of Asthal (Labour) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 9 February 2010. It occurred during Debate on bill on Terrorist Asset-Freezing (Temporary Provisions) Bill.


Terrorist Asset-Freezing (Temporary Provisions) Bill

I can reassure the noble Baroness that the amendment is unnecessary as Clause 1 already provides for this. The Bill does not provide for criminal liability for any acts or omissions before the Act comes into force. For the period between 4 February and the commencement of the Bill, failure to comply with the asset freeze will not be a criminal offence. The Bill makes that clear in Clause 2(5)(b). In any case, Clause 1 sets out clearly that the provisions of the Bill have effect only when the Bill has received Royal Assent. Therefore, I invite the noble Baroness to withdraw her amendment. I am very happy to have been able to clear that up.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
717 c673-4 
Session
2009-10
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Disclosure of information Appeals Assets Channel Islands Finance Licensing EU law Judgements Terrorism United Nations Supreme Court Time limits UN resolutions Freezing of assets Sunset clauses
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk