The difficulty with the hon. Gentleman’s argument is that he assumes that the Prime Minister of the day, regardless of which party he is in, would take such a decision in a vacuum, but it simply could not happen that way. He would have to be satisfied first with proper legal advice that it is in the interests of national security. Secondly, he would have to be satisfied that it is both necessary and proportionate. Passing all those tests requires a lot of advice, and I doubt that any Prime Minister would take the decision lightly. Bringing any Speaker into that decision-making process means that they must be linked to that legal and security advice to satisfy themselves in the same way as the Prime Minister would have to do. I therefore cannot see the difference.
Investigatory Powers Bill
Proceeding contribution from
George Howarth
(Labour)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 6 June 2016.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Investigatory Powers Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
611 c961 
Session
2016-17
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2017-02-20 10:23:59 +0000
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2016-06-06/1606071000032
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2016-06-06/1606071000032
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2016-06-06/1606071000032