Terrorism Bill

I want to pursue my earlier inquiry a little further. Our debate relates closely to what has happened at RAF Fairford, which I have visited on several occasions to talk to my constituents and others. Part of the problem surrounding the dispute and the question of section 44 powers under the Terrorism Act 2000 was disagreement about where the actual perimeter was. During the course of the conflict—it was a real conflict—the authorities moved the perimeter, which forced people away from their original encampment because they were told that it was within the site perimeter. It might be that the boundary around nuclear sites is more established and understood, but I know from my experience at Berkeley that disputes are ongoing about exactly where the full perimeter goes. I know as someone who is trying to pursue the de-licensing of that site that the matter is subject to arguments about land ownership. The situation is thus not as straightforward as simply saying, ““This is the site, so everyone knows where they are.”” Will the Minister clarify whether the exact perimeter of a site will have to be laid down before people are excluded from it? The matter might be fairly academic, as the hon. Member for Somerton and Frome (Mr. Heath) suggested, but a nasty situation can arise in the case of a dispute, because people can feel that their rights are being taken away if the designation of a perimeter is changed.