I have tabled Amendment 12 in this group. First, with regard to Amendment 10, I hope we will not hear from the Minister that it is not necessary to put the provision into the Bill because it is the practice—a point I may make later in a different context.
I might have said that my Amendment 12 was substantially the same as the amendments tabled by the noble Lord and the Minister. The point is the same—that the same or similar evidence should not be used to make more than one interim order. I could make the Government’s arguments against proposed new paragraph (b) in my Amendment 12, but I would like to hear them do so.
As regards the second limb of my amendment, it seemed to me that a time limit would be easier to deal with and could be more clearly analysed than relying on whether evidence is the same or substantially so. A time limit, although six months may not be the correct one, would make the matter absolutely clear—no one could argue with it or argue its nuances.
Terrorist Asset-Freezing etc. Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Baroness Hamwee
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Monday, 25 October 2010.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Terrorist Asset-Freezing etc. Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
721 c1054 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 13:23:17 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_672308
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_672308
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_672308