My decision to give way to the hon. Gentleman is vindicated. As ever, he has knowledge and experience of such matters and makes a practical suggestion. I do not accept that our proposal is a gesture. I believe that it will have an impact on reducing the available material. However, I should like to investigate whether we could consider action—not necessarily in the Bill—to cover people who perhaps inadvertently go on to such websites and those who positively search for them. The hon. Gentleman makes a fair point.
I am sure that hon. Members want to try to ensure that our law is effective. I do not believe that an appeal process is necessary because providers can simply ignore the notice, in which case they cannot avail themselves of the statutory defence. We all accept the power of the internet today and the fact that it is capable of radicalising young men and women and exposing them to material that none of us wants them to see.
It is important that we disagree with the Lords amendments. They are cumbersome, not at the right level, would lead to delay and make the provisions much less effective.
Terrorism Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Hazel Blears
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 15 February 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Terrorism Bill 2005-06.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
442 c1478 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-09-24 16:03:47 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_305036
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_305036
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_305036