UK Parliament / Open data

Terrorism Prevention and Investigation Measures Bill

My Lords, I certainly do not intend to press any of these amendments and I am grateful to the Minister for his explanations. I will comment on three of them. I am interested that a solicitor holding his client’s money might be providing financial services but am happy to accept that interpretation. On the first of the amendments, I take the Minister’s point about needing to use the correct terms, but I hope that every measure will be absolutely clear about the area as well as the place which is included—not, for instance, an ““area around”” or the ““environs of”” Heathrow Airport. If necessary, it would be proper for a map to be produced so that the individual as well as everybody else can be absolutely certain about what area is designated for this purpose. On the proposal for an independent commission, I am not seeking to challenge the architecture of the Bill and I am well aware of the court’s ruling that national security is not to be trumped. However, I hope that the Government and the new review group will take into account the points I have made, and the noble Baroness, Lady Stern, has made so powerfully, about, among other things, the need for an independent take on what is going on and the need to involve in the assessments people of experience and, where appropriate, non-members of the review group with that relevant experience. Having said that, and having thanked the Minister, I beg leave to withdraw Amendment 9. Amendment 9 withdrawn. Amendments 10 to 12 not moved. Amendment 13 Moved by
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
732 c620 
Session
2010-12
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Back to top