Results 1-20 of 117 for terrorism speaker:David Heath

Opposition Day — [16th Allotted Day]: US-UK Extradition Treaty (15 Jul 2009)

David Heath: ...Gentleman for giving way, and I will be very brief. Is not another factor that we ought to take into account the fact that it was originally suggested that the current treaty was a response to terrorism cases? The right hon. Member for Rotherham (Mr. MacShane) pretended again that it dealt only with grave cases, but in fact it applies to any case for which the maximum sentence is 12...

Business of the House: Standing Orders etc. (Machinery of Government Changes) (25 Jun 2009) has video

David Heath: ...difficulties. As the hon. Member for Bolton, South-East will remember, we received a very dusty response from the then Home Secretary when we were looking at aspects of the scientific response to terrorism. He made it very clear that he did not think that this was anything to do with the Science and Technology Committee and asked us please to poke our noses somewhere else rather than in...

Business of the House (7 May 2009) has video

David Heath: ...repeat offence; it is an innocent person. That is the key to the debate that we should have. Perhaps we could also discuss why figures reveal that the stop-and-search powers under section 44 of the Terrorism Act 2000 were used by the Metropolitan police on an enormous number of occasions; once every three minutes. Can that be justified? Last week, Lord Laming produced his progress report...

Business of the House (26 Mar 2009) has video

David Heath: ...we in this House consider how we can better help people suffering from those awful diseases in other parts of the world? May we have a debate on the misuse of powers granted by this House to combat terrorism and serious crime? We heard a chilling report today about the number of local authorities that use surveillance powers for trivial purposes, and we hear repeated reports about the...

Business of the House (22 Jan 2009) has video

David Heath: ..., for those two debates to be separated? It is unhelpful to Members who wish to raise matters about policing not to have the opportunity to engage directly with the Minister for Security, Counter-Terrorism, Crime and Policing, and a similar point could be made about those who wish to discuss local authorities. Many district councils, like those in my constituency, will be concerned about...

Orders of the Day: "Part IV — Bail (11 Jun 2008) has video

David Heath: I return to something that was said a long time ago by the hon. Member for Meirionnydd Nant Conwy (Mr. Llwyd): the Minister for Security, Counter-Terrorism, Crime and Policing did a good job in Committee—I served on it—in trying to bring the various parties together on the vast majority of the Bill. There is a great deal of consensus in the House on how we fight terrorism....

Public Bill Committee: Counter-Terrorism Bill: New Clause 1 (15 May 2008)

David Heath: ...clause, but it is important that we have had this debate and that we commit ourselves to adding the measure to the armoury of weapons available to the investigating and prosecuting authorities in terrorism cases. Until we have it on the statute book, whatever the Minister says about the limited application, we are deficient in what is available and that is regrettable. On that basis, I beg...

Public Bill Committee: Counter-Terrorism Bill: New Clause 5 (15 May 2008)

David Heath: ...the benefit of the doubt, but when they are in possession of the intelligence reports and the advice of the police agencies, they can make an assessment about whether an organisation is engaged in terrorism or is a supporter of it. The new clauses do not add anything other than encouraging the view that a national clamour through the press, or through MPs, can apply pressure on Ministers...

Public Bill Committee: Counter-Terrorism Bill: New Clause 1 (15 May 2008)

David Heath: ...should be available. No one has ever suggested that it is the one tool which is going to be efficacious when nothing else is. It is part of an array which we have been assembling in order to fight terrorism effectively. It is reasonable that we argue that when we have all the elements in place we can question whether other less satisfactory suggestions are required. That is the basis of...

Public Bill Committee: Counter-Terrorism Bill: New Clause 1 (15 May 2008)

David Heath: ...repeatedly over the years and which many of us feel very strongly ought to be part of the apparatus available to prosecutors in order to bring successful prosecutions. That certainly applies in terrorism cases where there is a strong argument for it, but I also believe that it would make a significant contribution to the fight against organised crime. Hitherto, Governments have always been...

Public Bill Committee: Counter-Terrorism Bill: Clause 72 (15 May 2008)

David Heath: ...that purpose this afternoon, and it is entirely probable that we will not wish to enter into a debate on it. Does the hon. and learned Gentleman agree that it is time that we revisited the Prevention of Terrorism Act 2005 and looked at the matter in the round?

Public Bill Committee: Counter-Terrorism Bill: None (15 May 2008)

David Heath: ...back to the point that somehow one has to offer or be engaged in some sort of discourse with a terrorist for this offence to bite, and that that is shown by its context after section 58 of the Terrorism Act 2000. Is the right hon. Gentleman saying that this new clause is qualified by other clauses within  the Terrorism Act? If it is not, and if it is read as it stands, that is clearly...

Public Bill Committee: Counter-Terrorism Bill: Clause 64 (13 May 2008)

David Heath: ...that people are concerned about that, notwithstanding what I believe to be the good intentions of the Minister. It is not surprising that people are concerned about that in the context of a counter-terrorism Bill and not a coroners Bill that seeks to reform the process of coroners’ courts. I accept that there may be circumstances in the context of the policing of terrorist activities...

Public Bill Committee: Counter-Terrorism Bill: Clause 51 (13 May 2008)

David Heath: ...apply, which is the purport of amendments Nos. 39 to 42. As the Bill is constructed, there is an indefinite period for serious cases and a ten-year period for less serious cases—any terrorism offences are serious. My amendments would effectively put break clauses in those periods every five years. The initial notification period would be for five years; in the case of a serious...

Public Bill Committee: Counter-Terrorism Bill: Clause 40 (13 May 2008)

David Heath: ...a service court for the odd circumstance of perhaps late evidence in the progress of a trial in a service court, which has led to a suggestion of an aggravated offence by reason of connection with terrorism—why should the case then have to be abandoned in order to put it before an ordinary criminal court? I do not understand why the service court needs to be excluded, if the...

Public Bill Committee: Counter-Terrorism Bill: Clause 29 (8 May 2008)

David Heath: ...Gentleman’s arguments, which, as he knows, are similar to the ones that we had hoped to deploy in this group. In the circumstances where he envisages a jury establishing whether there is a terrorism connection, what standard of proof does he believe would be appropriate? I notice that he has added his name to our amendment No. 27 but not to our amendment No. 28. Does that suggest...

Public Bill Committee: Counter-Terrorism Bill: Clause 27 (8 May 2008)

David Heath: ...with the Governments of the Crown territories within the British Isles regarding reciprocal arrangements for jurisdiction in the Isle of Man and the Channel Islands. It seems entirely possible that terrorism could be aimed at UK interests in the Channel Islands, presenting a difficulty with jurisdiction that is not entirely covered by the clause dealing with offences committed outside the UK.

Public Bill Committee: Counter-Terrorism Bill: Clause 26 (8 May 2008)

David Heath: ...abduction, in relation to an offence listed in subsection (1) above.’. The amendment relates to the specificity of clause 26, which lists an awful lot of offences that have the meaning of a terrorism offence for the purposes of certain sections of the Bill. However, the list does not accord with the list of offences in schedule 2 for which a terrorist connection is to be considered....

Public Bill Committee: Counter-Terrorism Bill: Further written evidence to be reported to the House (8 May 2008)

David Heath: ...of order, Mr. Bercow. We have to be careful not to be overcome by our own pomposity on such matters. Having said that, those witnesses were the Government’s principal advisers on counter-terrorism. They were important witnesses who should have given accurate information. That they did not, in that instance, is regrettable in the extreme, but that they saw fit to communicate with us...

Public Bill Committee: Counter-Terrorism Bill: Clause 2 (29 Apr 2008)

David Heath: ...any proposals. The hon. and learned Member for Beaconsfield has rather elegantly interpolated an entirely spurious debate in terms of the Bill, but one that it is very important to have on counter-terrorism. As he is in order, we must be too. The hon. and learned Gentleman asked whether the arrangements for ensuring that a key to encryption is provided are adequate. An anxiety was...