Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Baroness Hayman (Crossbench) in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 15 November 2011. It occurred during Debate on bill on Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Bill.


Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Bill

My Lords, the noble Lord, Lord Pannick, has spoken with his usual clarity and force and that means I can be very brief. It was the issue of time limiting the provisions of the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 that six years ago brought me into conflict with my then own—and then government—Front Bench. I am delighted that the noble Lord, Lord Hunt of Kings Heath, has put his name to the amendment. I have to say, however, that like the noble Lord, Lord Newton, I was disappointed at his attitude on Amendment 1. He invoked the principle of consistency. I think he ought to be careful about that when we review this particular amendment, given that the Labour position then on time limiting was consistently to oppose any form of time limiting on the 2005 Act until two thumping defeats in this House and some fairly vigorous ping-pong.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
732 c630 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Civil liberties Counter-terrorism Deportation Assets Airports Ministerial powers National security Police Powers Parliamentary scrutiny Terrorism Anti-terrorism control orders UK Border Agency Olympic Games 2012 Paralympic Games 2012 Terrorism prevention and investigation measures
Legislation
Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Bill 2010-12
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk