Commons Sense

House of Commons · Bill Debate

Counter-Terrorism and Sentencing Bill - Clause 23 - Terrorism sentence with fixed licence period: Scotland

22 March 2021 · 6 other contributors

Opened by Chris Philp Con Croydon South

Justice & CourtsScotland

Summarised by AI from the official record, so it can contain mistakes.

Read the full transcript on Parliament.uk

At a glance

Chris Philp raised concerns about counter-terrorism and sentencing bill - clause 23 - terrorism sentence with fixed licence period: scotland in the House of Commons. Other MPs contributed to the debate.

Key points

  • Concerns were raised about Clause 23 regarding terrorism sentence with fixed licence period in Scotland
  • Specific asks of the government were not recorded in the debate
  • No commitments were made by the government during the debate

How the debate unfolded

MPs spoke in turn to share their views and ask questions. Here's what each person said.

Other contributors (6)
  • Nigel Evans Con Constituency Unknown

    Encouraged MPs to make short contributions and participate remotely without imposing time limits.

  • Conor McGinn Lab St Helens North

    Acknowledged Minister’s conduct in discussing the bill. Raised concerns about effectiveness of new tools proposed and lack of information on lone wolf terrorists review. Welcomed government concessions but questioned their adequacy. Emphasised the need for a responsive approach to emerging threats.

  • Bob Neill Con Bromley and Chislehurst

    Supported the Bill, commending government’s listening and compromise. Praised position on burden of proof and five-year limit as sensible compromises. Emphasised importance of balancing citizen protection with rule of law.

  • Stuart McDonald SNP Cumbernauld, Kilsyth and Kirkintilloch East

    Acknowledged engagement on Scottish concerns but raised concerns about the doubling of TPIM restrictions period while lowering proof standard. Suggested four years was sufficient concession and believed reasonable belief standard is lower than balance of probabilities.

  • Alistair Carmichael Lib Dem Orkney and Shetland

    Called for evidence to justify extension from four years to five years, expressing concern that without proper justification, Government risks judicial intervention.

  • Ben Everitt

    Supported TPIM measures as a last resort and argued they ensure public safety, emphasising stronger sentencing, improved monitoring and agility against evolving threats.

▸ Assessment & feedback
Summary accuracy