Proceeding contribution from Lord Davies of Stamford (Labour) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 6 October 2010. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Terrorist Asset-Freezing etc. Bill [HL].
Terrorist Asset-Freezing etc. Bill [HL]
The Minister is answering me by saying that the balance is in favour of the Treasury route because it is a more appropriate route, which is slightly circular. Can I establish what exactly it is that the Government feel is in the route’s favour? What are the decisive criteria in favour of taking the route that they suggest? Is it a matter of time? Is the noble Lord suggesting that it is a matter of time because Ministers could take decisions more quickly than a judge could grant an ex parte injunction or designation? If not time, what other specific considerations does the noble Lord have in mind?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 721 c136
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Disclosure of information Compensation Civil liberties Appeals Assets Bank services Banks Court orders Advocacy Financial services Financial institutions Insurance International cooperation Money laundering Terrorism Stocks and shares Treasury Sequestration of assets High Court
- Legislation
- Terrorist Asset-freezing etc Bill (HL) 2010-12
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 18:27:24 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_666480
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_666480
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_666480