The hon. Gentleman must have a little patience and allow me to explain the point. He has made that point on innumerable occasions, and I shall deal with it. I repeat that Lord Carlile thinks that the provision is proportionate and the proper thing for us to do.
It is right to highlight ““glorification”” in clause 1 and I direct the hon. Gentleman’s attention to clause 1(2) which says that, for the purposes of direct or indirect incitement,"““offences include every statement which . . . glorifies the commission or preparation . . . of . . . offences.””"
The use of the word ““include”” means that we do not have a stand-alone offence of glorification, but statements of glorification are included within the ambit of the direct or indirect incitement in clause 1. That is the point that the hon. Member for Rugby and Kenilworth (Jeremy Wright) made in his thoughtful contribution. It is important to include reference to glorification for the very reason that it is a new concept to our courts and, therefore, we need to provide the courts with a guide to the kind of behaviour that we are trying to ensure is covered through the direct and indirect incitement provision.
The hon. Member for Beaconsfield (Mr. Grieve) said that he found the provision ““a distasteful concept””. Well, most of us would find statements that glorify, praise and celebrate terrorism in a way that is likely to encourage others to emulate terrorism more than distasteful. We find them completely unacceptable. The hon. Member for Rugby and Kenilworth was generous enough to acknowledge that we do now face a new kind of threat from international terrorism, including people making the sort of statements that we have not heard in the past. Therefore, although the right hon. Member for Suffolk, Coastal (Mr. Gummer) was kind enough to say that I am not the sort of person who ignores history, I am the sort of person who wants to ensure that our law is fit to address some of the new threats that we face as well as our experience in the past. There is universal acknowledgement in this House that the threat that we face from international terrorism now is significantly different from threats that we have faced in the past.
Terrorism Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Hazel Blears
(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 c428-9 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-09-24 16:00:34 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_272722
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_272722
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_272722