Proceeding contribution from Lord Bach (Labour) in the House of Lords on Monday, 25 October 2010. It occurred during Debate on bill on Terrorist Asset-Freezing etc. Bill [HL].
Terrorist Asset-Freezing etc. Bill [HL]
Briefly, I can say only to the noble and learned Minister: plus ça change. Here I am, supporting in what I am about to say the suggestion made by the noble Lord, Lord Pannick, in his amendment. I do so in rough terms; I am not in any way inviting him to test the opinion of the House on it today. This is surely a matter that can be dealt with in some more satisfactory way than that. The noble Lord seems to have a point, backed up as he is by the noble Lord, Lord Lester, and the noble and learned Lord, Lord Mackay of Clashfern. I ask the Minister this simple question. Presumably he will argue that, "““such order as it considers appropriate””," includes damages. If the answer to that question is yes, can there be any reason not to put that in the Bill in express terms, for the reasons stated by the noble Lord, Lord Pannick?
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 721 c1068
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Disclosure of information Appeals Human rights Jurisdiction Financial services Financial institutions International cooperation Money laundering Terrorism Treasury Sequestration of assets Freezing of assets
- 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 13:23:30 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_672338
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_672338
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_672338