House of Lords portcullis
House of Lords
Session 2007 - 08
Internet Publications
Other Bills before Parliament


 
 

 

Counter-Terrorism Bill

commons AMENDMENTs and reasons

[The page and line references are to HL Bill 65, the bill as first printed for the Lords.]

Before Clause 14

LORDS AMENDMENT NO. 2

2

Insert the following new Clause—

 

“National guidelines on fingerprint and sample database

 

(1)    

The Secretary of State shall by regulations publish national guidelines for

 

governmental agencies establishing—

 

(a)    

a procedure by which a person can request a statement of what

 

information relating to fingerprints and samples is held on them or

 

on a dependent;

 

(b)    

a procedure by which a person can request that such information

 

held on them or a dependent is destroyed;

 

(c)    

the circumstances in which a request under paragraph (b) may be

 

refused.

 

(2)    

If a request made under subsection (1)(b) is refused under subsection (1)(c),

 

the relevant agency shall write to the person setting out why such

 

information will not be destroyed and when such circumstances as prevent

 

it being destroyed may no longer apply.

 

(3)    

In drawing up guidelines under subsection (1), the Secretary of State shall

 

consult such bodies as he thinks appropriate.

 

(4)    

Regulations under subsection (1) shall not be made until a draft copy is laid

 

before, and approved by resolution of, both Houses of Parliament.”

 

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND REASON

 

The Commons disagree to Lords Amendment No. 2 for the following Reason—

 
 
HL Bill 9654/3

 
 

2

2A

Because it would involve a charge on public funds, and the Commons do not offer any

 

further Reason, trusting that this Reason may be deemed sufficient.

Before Clause 22

LORDS AMENDMENT NO. 3

3

Insert the following new Clause—

 

“No extension of pre-charge detention

 

For the avoidance of doubt, nothing in this Act allows the Secretary of State

 

to extend the maximum period of pre-charge detention beyond 28 days.”

 

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND REASON

 

The Commons disagree to Lords Amendment No. 3 for the following Reason—

3A

Because the provision made by the amendment has no legal effect.

Clause 33

LORDS AMENDMENT NO. 15

15

Leave out Clause 33

 

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND AMENDMENTS IN LIEU

 

The Commons disagree to Lords Amendment No. 15, but propose the following

 

Amendments in lieu thereof—

15A

Transpose Clause 33 to after Clause 88

15B

Page 97, leave out lines 23 to 27

15C

Page 98, line 13, at end insert—

 

“Part 6

 

Pre-charge detention

 

Short title and Chapter

Extent of repeal

 
 

Terrorism Act 2000 (c. 11)

In Schedule 8, in paragraph 29(4)(a) and (c), the

 
  

words “after consulting the Lord

 
  

Chancellor”.”

 

After Clause 80

LORDS AMENDMENT NO. 106

106

Insert the following new Clause—

 
 

 
 

3

 
 

“Inquests: intercept evidence

 

(1)    

In section 18 of the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act 2000 (c. 23)

 

(exceptions to section 17), after subsection (7)(c) insert—

 

“(d)    

a disclosure to a coroner or to a person appointed as counsel

 

to an inquest or to members of a jury or to any properly

 

interested person where—

 

(i)    

the coroner holding the inquest is a judge of the

 

High Court; and

 

(ii)    

the coroner has ordered the disclosure to be made to

 

the coroner alone or (as the case may be) to the

 

coroner and the person appointed as counsel to the

 

inquest or to members of a jury or to any properly

 

interested person.”

 

(2)    

After subsection (8A) insert—

 

“(8B)    

A coroner shall not order a disclosure under subsection (7)(d)

 

except where the coroner is satisfied that the exceptional

 

circumstances of the case make the disclosure essential to enable the

 

matters that are required to be ascertained by the inquest to be

 

ascertained.”

 

(3)    

After subsection (11) insert—

 

“(11A)    

References in this section to a coroner apply only where the coroner

 

is a judge of the High Court.”

 

(4)    

This section has effect in relation to inquests that have begun, but have not

 

been concluded, before the day on which it comes into force as well as to

 

inquests beginning on or after that day.”

 

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND REASON

 

The Commons disagree to Lords Amendment No. 106 for the following Reason—

106A

Because sensitive material should not be disclosed to members of the public.

Schedule 2

LORDS AMENDMENT NO. 115

115

Leave out Schedule 2

 

COMMONS AGREEMENT WITH CONSEQUENTIAL AMENDMENT

 

The Commons agree to Lords Amendment No. 115, and propose the following

 

consequential Amendment to the Bill—

115A

Page 97, leave out lines 28 to 31

 
 

 
 

4

 

In the Title

LORDS AMENDMENT NO. 133

133

Line 7, after “inquiries” insert “and inquests”

 

COMMONS DISAGREEMENT AND REASON

 

The Commons disagree to Lords Amendment No. 133 for the following Reason—

133A

Because sensitive material should not be disclosed to members of the public.

 
 

 
contents
 
House of Lords home page Houses of Parliament home page House of Commons home page search page enquiries

© Parliamentary copyright 2008
Revised 20 November 2008