Proceeding contribution from Liam Byrne (Labour) in the House of Commons on Monday, 8 February 2010. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Terrorist Asset-Freezing (Temporary Provisions) Bill.
Terrorist Asset-Freezing (Temporary Provisions) Bill
There is the simple idea that eight weeks is not an ideal time in which to pass the legislation. The legislation could have gone through in eight weeks, but if it is possible to give the House more time to debate it, that is surely right. What changed last week was the Supreme Court's decision not to grant a stay. It would have been unreasonable to ask the banks to keep the money frozen for the amount of time it would have taken the House to give the matter proper consideration.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 505 c659
- Session
- 2009-10
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Disclosure of information Assets Crown dependencies Channel Islands Finance Licensing Human rights Legal aid scheme EU law Isle of Man National security Parliamentary scrutiny Terrorism United Nations Supreme Court UN resolutions al Qaeda Taliban Freezing of assets Sunset clauses
- Legislation
- Terrorist Asset-freezing (Temporary Provisions) Bill 2009-10
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 19:56:55 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_624619
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_624619
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_624619