My Lords, I thank the Minister for that clarification on what constitutes information. That is reassuring. I also thank other noble Lords for their contributions to the discussion. Surely, the Minister and the Government are aware that quite a lot of unease remains about the workings of the extradition treaty and whether it represents reciprocity, putting it in simple layman's language. I raised a number of other points and perhaps I can have a conversation separately with the Minister about them. I offered to look at the drafting if the problem with my amendment was unintended effect; it was not intended to disable us fulfilling our obligations as laid down or to create a condition of prima facie evidence. I do not think that we need to be hung up on that. However, I suspect that I am not going to get any co-operation on drafting. In light of the discussion we have had and, perhaps, the inability to take this further, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment 96 withdrawn.
Amendment 96ZA
Moved by
Policing and Crime Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Neville-Jones
(Conservative)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 5 November 2009.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Policing and Crime Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
714 c476 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 13:41:11 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_592944
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_592944
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_592944