UK Parliament / Open data

Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 (Continuance in force of sections 1 to 9) Order 2009

My Lords, for all the reasons that have been expressed, control orders are in principle objectionable. They may also have an adverse effect on the children of detainees in such minor ways as the children being unable to use, or have very limited use of, computers, which of course all children nowadays have to use at school. It is perhaps a small matter, but it could be alleviated for the children of these suspects. I also agree with the criticisms of the Government’s failure to deal with intercept evidence. It really is time that it was looked at properly and that something was done about it. The Government should seek other methods in addition to control orders. However, the Minister tells us that among the 15 suspects, intercept evidence, if it had been put forward, would not have been relevant to the trials of some of them. One has to bear that in mind if that is the case. The Government should be looking at alternatives to reduce the number of control orders, but, with the greatest possible reluctance, I recognise that if one balances the importance to the public of security against the tension of control orders for this number of people, with the provisos that have been mentioned, I cannot see how we can legitimately oppose today’s order. It extremely important that the order should be renewed and that the criticisms made today should be met by the Government before this time next year.

About this proceeding contribution

Reference

708 c860-1 

Session

2008-09

Chamber / Committee

House of Lords chamber
Back to top