Measures on compensation could be included in such legislation if that is what the House wishes. I know of the hon. Gentleman’s own family losses to terrorism in relation to certain events. It is difficult to decide how far the international obligations run and what the relationship is between a compensation scheme, such as the criminal injuries compensation scheme, and the insurance principle. There has been much discussion in Government about that matter to see how we could make progress and we will set out any proposals that we have in due course. I do not think, however, that there is a simple equity between somebody who loses their life on the London underground and someone who loses their life in a terrorist atrocity in some other country, whether it be in Sharm el-Sheikh or Bali. It is a difficult issue.
On the overall approach, legislation certainly benefits from being clear, and that is one of the arguments for a codification, which would at least lead to a reduction in the quantity of words and—I hope—a gain in the clarity of the legal intent.
Prevention of Terrorism Act
Proceeding contribution from
Charles Clarke
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Thursday, 2 February 2006.
It occurred during Ministerial statement on Prevention of Terrorism Act.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
442 c489 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 11:46:39 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_297430
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_297430
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_297430