I have spoken on a number of issues already, so I shall be brief. I agree with the general sentiment that we must prevent terrorist activity and the funding that supports it. I would rather that we had seen a court-based system that was fair and safeguarded civil liberties in the ways that I tried to draw out, but I accept that that is not what we have. The system that I would like to see would provide the national security that we need while protecting the civil liberties that we deserve, but I accept that that is not the settled will of the House.
There is still one issue of detail that I would like to explore. Clause 25(1) contains the fascinating phrase:"““Nothing done under this Chapter is to be treated as a breach of any restriction imposed by statute or otherwise.””"
Let me give the Minister a further chance to comment. Could he perhaps reassure me that that phrase is not intended to mean that the Human Rights Act 1998 and common law rights would not apply? That is one possible reading of it. I believe that that is not the intended meaning, so can he assure me that the Human Rights Act and common law will remain sovereign? If he wants to say that, I shall be delighted to let him intervene.
In the meantime, while the Minister reads the clause, let me reflect on what the Bill does. It is interesting to consider the scale of the problem. There was a statement from the Minister on 23 November about how many accounts had been frozen—a total of 205 accounts as of 30 September, containing less than £290,000. Although terrorist activities can be carried out on relatively small sums of money, we should be clear with ourselves and with the public about the amounts that are involved. Of that £290,000, only £140,000 would be covered by the Bill, as it was covered by the predecessor legislation. That is a relatively small amount although it can, of course, have a large effect.
The Bill is not as good as it could be and that is a shame, but it is a lot better than its predecessors. I welcome that fact and the effort that the Government have made to accept amendments in the other place, if not here. I am happy to see it pass its Third Reading.
Question put and agreed to.
Bill accordingly read the Third time and passed, with amendments.
Terrorist Asset-Freezing etc. Bill [Lords]
Proceeding contribution from
Julian Huppert
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 14 December 2010.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Terrorist Asset-Freezing etc. Bill [Lords].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
520 c874-5 Session
2010-12Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 13:53:24 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_693814
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_693814
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_693814