It is pleasant to speak on an issue where there are no opportunities for banker bashing. I also remind noble Lords of my personal declarations of interest: I record my membership of Amnesty and Liberty. I am deeply concerned about many of the issues that lie at the heart of some of the matters that we are considering today.
On behalf of the Government, I also welcome the support that the Conservative Party and the Liberal Party are giving to the necessary steps that we are taking to protect the security of the country. I recognise the concerns expressed by the noble Baronesses, Lady Noakes and Lady Hamwee, but I also applaud the fact that, notwithstanding those concerns, they encourage the passing of the necessary orders.
The noble Baroness, Lady Noakes, referred to the consultation process. I remember well the debate that we had at Second Reading in the House about the sunset provision. We produced the consultation document in March, having laid the draft legislation on 5 February. The consultation document is deliberately wide to encourage as broad as possible a range of issues to be brought forward, rather than asking narrower questions. I agree with the noble Baroness that, in view of that approach—which, of course, was the consequence of deliberation on our part—the document did not take a great deal of time to prepare. The key issue is the length of time that it takes people to prepare and consider their responses. That is why we need the time for proper scrutiny of the Bill, including through public discussion and debate about the issues to which it gives rise.
Consideration of the draft legislation can start as soon as we believe that the consultation process has completed its necessary stages. There will of course be a full debate on the proposed formal legislation. I look forward to that, because issues were certainly raised in respect of the temporary legislation which, in view of the time available, were probably not fully debated. These are issues which need to be debated with great care. We look forward to and welcome the debates that will take place as the Bill works its way through Parliament.
To pick up one or two other questions, the noble Baroness, Lady Noakes, asked yesterday why the consultation on the terrorist asset-freezing regime specifically excludes those covered by the al-Qaeda and Taliban asset-freezing regime. As I explained, the answer is simply that EC Regulation 881/2002 has direct effect in UK law. The UK is required to provide effective and proportionate penalties for breach of the EC regulation. Given the limited purpose of the Al-Qaida and Taliban (Asset-Freezing) Regulations, a consultation would not be appropriate for the al-Qaeda asset-freezing regime.
However, the Government take the view that given the points raised by the Supreme Court and the obvious public and parliamentary interest, it is right that the regulations should be subject to approval by Parliament under the affirmative procedure, and I welcome the fact that we are debating the regulations today.
Al-Qaida and Taliban (Asset-Freezing) Regulations 2010
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Myners
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 25 March 2010.
It occurred during Debates on delegated legislation on Al-Qaida and Taliban (Asset-Freezing) Regulations 2010.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
718 c460-1GC Session
2009-10Chamber / Committee
House of Lords Grand CommitteeSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-22 01:46:16 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_634412
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_634412
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_634412