Prevention of Terrorism

Part of Opposition Day – in the House of Commons at 11:26 pm on 6 March 1990.

Alert me about debates like this

Photo of Mr John Patten Mr John Patten , Oxford West and Abingdon 11:26, 6 March 1990

I had better be guided by my right hon. and learned Friend the Attorney-General and refrain from discussing examples that might be seen as too close to home

Let me return to the second point of the right hon. Member for Sparkbrook. The fact that the police do not bring a charge does not invalidate the grounds on which a detention was made. The information may be too sensitive to bring before the court. This point was referred to by the hon. Member for Caithness and Sutherland. The powers are preventive, and they may frustrate terrorism.

Let us consider the cases that have arisen since the Brogan judgment—the incidents that we have had in Great Britain which, alas, have escaped the attentions of the ordinary forces of law and order, and have escaped the attentions of provisions of the Prevention of Terrorism Act. I refer to incidents such as the bomb at Turnhill barracks on 20 February 1989; the bomb at the Royal Marines school of music on 22 February; and the car bomb discovered and defused outside the home of the commander of the United Kingdom field army on 15 November 1989. The Opposition do not seem to treat this very seriously.

Then there were the car bomb that exploded at the married quarters in Colchester on 18 November 1989; the car bomb that exploded outside the Combined Services recruitment centre in Leicester on 20 February 1990, on which one Leicester Member, by his comments immediately afterwards, covered himself with such glory; and, most recently, the bomb that exploded at the Army recruiting office in Halifax on 25 February 1990. What a litany that is. But, alas, the Labour party does not want powers to enable the forces of law and order to deal with a terrorist threat that is unique in western Europe.