Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Crispin Blunt (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 4 March 2010. It occurred during Debates on delegated legislation on Prevention and Suppression of Terrorism.


Prevention and Suppression of Terrorism

I am grateful, Madam Deputy Speaker, but I may not be alone in detecting a certain philosophical inconsistency in the hon. Lady's position. I am grateful to the Minister for setting out the Government's reasons for the order, and Her Majesty's Opposition will support the Government in seeking to add al-Shabaab to the list of proscribed organisations. Decisions to proscribe organisations should not be taken lightly. Free speech is a cornerstone of our democracy, and the Conservative party is clear that proscription should apply only to organisations whose activities include engagement in terrorism and its active encouragement. The Minister will remember the arguments made by Conservative Members, most notably my hon. and learned Friend the Member for Beaconsfield (Mr. Grieve), during the debate on the Terrorism Act 2006. We sought to distinguish clearly between exhortation to commit acts of terrorism as opposed to the Government's definitions around glorification. I remind the House that, in seeking to prevent and suppress terrorism, we must do so in a way consistent with our values, and I am satisfied today that we can support the Government. However, I have several questions for the Minister. Before I ask specific questions in response to the Minister's introduction of the order, may I make a point about methodology? When the Government proscribed Islam4UK in January, it followed press coverage of a proposed march in Wootton Bassett. The Opposition supported the ban on Islam4UK, and it was widely known that the organisation was a successor to al-Ghurabaa and the Saved Sect. However, the timing of the ban suggested that it was in reaction to the proposals for a demonstration and in response to public pressure. Can the Minister assure the House that the decision to proscribe continues to be based on evidence? In the light of these questions, and those to follow, will he give the House more detail on the internal process that leads to an order such as today's?


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
506 c1041-2 
Session
2009-10
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Evidence Proscribed organisations Terrorism Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam al Shabaab
Legislation
Terrorism Act 2000 (Proscribed Organisations) (Amendment) Order 2010
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk