Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Hamwee (Liberal Democrat) 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

My Lords, the amendment does not seek to truncate the parliamentary process. We have already dealt with the sunset provision and my amendment would not alter that. It would merely put in place a different interim regime. I did not sit through the proceedings on the 2001 legislation, but I find it difficult to believe that the Government allowed Parliament to ignore the kind of matters that the noble and learned Baroness has just raised. As regards freezing assets in respect of those who are subject to Section 4, surely that must have been considered and debated, and the Government must have been clear in their mind that all the corners had been covered. I think that I shall test the opinion of the Committee. Division on Amendment 6D Contents 48; Not-Contents 162. Amendment 6D disagreed. Clause 1 agreed. Amendment 7 not moved. Clause 2 : Protection of things done or omitted in interim period Clause 2 : Protection of things done or omitted in interim period Debate on whether Clause 2 should stand part of the Bill.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
717 c676-8 
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