My understanding—it may be the hon. Gentleman's—is that the reason the Government suddenly came forward with these proposals was a problem encountered in one particular case, which interestingly enough is not terrorist related. Does he agree that the oddity is that the anxiety that the full facts should emerge in that one particular case, which is given as the justification for the change, seems in a way to be completely counterbalanced by the fact that even if the facts emerge correctly in that case and in the way that Government intend through this process, there will not be the transparency that will enable the verdict to be accepted?
Counter-Terrorism Bill (Programme) (No. 2)
Proceeding contribution from
Dominic Grieve
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 10 June 2008.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Counter-Terrorism Bill (Programme) (No. 2).
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
477 c242 Session
2007-08Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 01:08:04 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_483272
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_483272
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_483272