Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Mark Hoban (Conservative) 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

The route available now to the Government —the emergency Bill today and a longer period of scrutiny—could have been the plan originally discussed between ourselves and the Treasury when the issue first arose. Suddenly, the Government have had a change of heart. We could have had the emergency legislation before us today and the longer discussion period for the Bill, but when the Supreme Court issued its original judgment, the longer Bill was the preferred option. There was no sense then from the Treasury that there was a plan B. It has suddenly arisen as a consequence of last Thursday's judgment.


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