I agree with all that and, as I said to the House both on Second Reading and in Committee, we think the case for the right hon. Gentleman’s point is well made. Application of the procedure that he set out may mean that it would be less necessary in a given case, and thus there would be fewer cases where there was an extended period of pre-charge detention. The key point, however, is that it does not remove the need for pre-charge detention in certain circumstances, although I agree that the number would be limited. Nevertheless, I accept the integrity of his point; the view is shared across the Government that we need to achieve the state of affairs that he described. It is none the less important to note that there are implications for other aspects of the conduct of our legal process and they, too, need to be considered.
Terrorism Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Charles Clarke
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 9 November 2005.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Terrorism Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
439 c330 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-09-24 15:59:48 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_272372
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_272372
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_272372