Terrorism Bill

As I say, we covered a lot of this ground in Committee, and I have genuinely tried to narrow the provision’s ambit while trying to ensure that it is workable. I point out amendments Nos. 35, 41 and 42 to the hon. Gentleman. Again, they make an important clarification to the Bill. They make it clear that, for an offence to be committed, the audience has to understand that what is being said is an inducement for them and no one else to commit terrorist acts. For example, no offence will be committed if a member of an audience at an academic lecture thinks, ““Well, I am not encouraged to commit terrorist acts, but I can quite imagine that, if this sentiment was expressed at a gathering of young Muslim men, it could have an encouraging effect on them.”” I think that that is implicit in the drafting, but those amendments make it absolutely explicit that the likely effect must be on the people to whom the statement is addressed. I hope that the hon. Gentleman will appreciate that that is another attempt by the Government to try to narrow the provision’s ambit and focus it on the mischief to which this part of the Bill is addressed: those who directly or indirectly incite people to commit acts of terrorism. I hope that he will give us credit for seeking to narrow the ambit of the offence in those terms.