I do agree. As I said to the Home Secretary last week, the controversial nature of the Bill makes it immensely desirable that, if at all possible, this House should reach an agreed position so that we can all vote for the Bill on Third Reading tomorrow. But to do that we must debate, and if the debate is curtailed so that important parts of the Bill are never considered at all, that will place those who wish to consider them in great difficulty. As the Home Secretary knows, because the Bill is so controversial, there must be a risk that the other place will take over the responsibility that we have shirked—and that we shall find ourselves involved, as we have too often in the past, in late-night spats as we try to sort out the differences between this House and the other place. Let me say sincerely to the Home Secretary that I think that that can be avoided, or largely avoided, if there is sufficient time, but I do not think there is at present.
Terrorism Bill (Programme) (No. 2)
Proceeding contribution from
Dominic Grieve
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 9 November 2005.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Terrorism Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
439 c312 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberLibrarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 21:19:56 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_272327
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_272327
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_272327