We have approached the matter from the position that we do not like any extension of 14 days. Our earlier willingness to support the hon. Gentleman’s amendment, if it was pressed, was based, first, on the desire to reach a consensus with the Government if it were possible to maintain it, and secondly, on the belief that 28 days was not some trade-off or Dutch auction, but the outer limit of what is acceptable. I emphasise that to the Home Secretary. If he were to say 21 days, I would be a much happier man. We pitched the limit very precisely because we thought it the proper place to do so.
I would much prefer not to see this aspect of the legislation happening at all, but if it is to happen, and if the Government are sincere—I trust the Home Secretary in a way that I do not trust every Minister—we will work with the Home Secretary to try to achieve the consensus that he has always desired and to make sure that the legislation commands widespread support not only in this House, but in the country.
Terrorism Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Dominic Grieve
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 2 November 2005.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Terrorism Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
438 c938 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-09-24 15:59:39 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_273702
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_273702
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_273702