Terrorism Act 2000 (Proscribed Organisations) (Amendment) Order 2025

Debate between Lord Austin of Dudley and Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb
Thursday 3rd July 2025

(2 days, 13 hours ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb Portrait Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb (GP)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I am so sorry, but no. If the noble Lord does not mind, I would like to finish my speech.

Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb Portrait Baroness Jones of Moulsecoomb (GP)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

No.

This SI goes directly against the promises made by Ministers when the anti-terror laws were introduced. The then Home Secretary, Charles Clarke, clarified that if direct action groups

“do not engage in serious violence … the new definition cannot catch them”.—[Official Report, Commons, 14/12/1999; col. 227.]

The current definition of terrorism includes property damage to cover

“actions which might not be violent in themselves but which can, in a modern society, have a devastating impact”.

Based on what the Minister has said and what the Government have told us, Palestine Action’s activities have not had the potential for a “devastating impact” on society, and nor have its activities included a pattern of serious violence. Yet the Government are putting it into the same category as Islamic State and al-Qaeda, setting an incredibly dangerous precedent that will impact on numerous peaceful campaigning groups. There is a long and noble tradition—