Prevention and Suppression of Terrorism

Debate between Dan Jarvis and Clive Lewis
Wednesday 2nd July 2025

(3 days, 7 hours ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Dan Jarvis Portrait Dan Jarvis
- Hansard - -

I do not acknowledge that, and I do not accept the hon. Gentleman’s characterisation of the decision we have taken. If he will listen to what I have to say, I hope he will understand why we are progressing in this way.

The attack at Brize Norton on 20 June has understandably provoked shock and anger in this House and across the country, but it was just the latest episode in Palestine Action’s long history of harmful activity. It has orchestrated a nationwide campaign of attacks that have resulted in serious damage to property and crossed the threshold between direct criminal action and terrorism. I hope that goes some way to responding to the point that my hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West (Dame Chi Onwurah) made. Palestine Action members have used violence against people responding at the scene of attacks. For their role in co-ordinated attacks, members of the organisation have been charged with serious offences, including violent disorder, grievous bodily harm with intent and aggravated burglary, which is an offence involving a weapon.

Clive Lewis Portrait Clive Lewis (Norwich South) (Lab)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank the Minister for giving way, and for some of the things that he has said. Everything he has spoken about could be dealt with under criminal law. My hon. Friend the Member for Newcastle upon Tyne Central and West (Dame Chi Onwurah) mentioned the suffragettes. I think we need to give the context of a little bit of history. The suffragettes carried out a campaign of window-smashing, poster and paint defacement, cutting telegraph and railway lines and targeted bombing and arson, but specifically avoided harming people. There is a long history in this country of direct action that pushes the boundaries of our democracy. It is very difficult for all of us, but this is still direct action, not terrorist action.

Dan Jarvis Portrait Dan Jarvis
- Hansard - -

I acknowledge my hon. Friend’s point about history, and it is entirely reasonable context for him and others to raise, but ultimately this Government must respond to events taking place in the here and now. The Government have to make sometimes difficult decisions about what measures are required to keep the public safe. He is absolutely within his rights to make comparisons with other groups, but as I will explain, fundamentally the Home Secretary has to take a view on whether a legal threshold has been crossed, and if it has, she has to make a judgment on whether she wishes to proceed.

Oral Answers to Questions

Debate between Dan Jarvis and Clive Lewis
Monday 21st October 2024

(8 months, 2 weeks ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Dan Jarvis Portrait Dan Jarvis
- View Speech - Hansard - -

I am concerned to hear about the case that the hon. Gentleman raises, and I would be happy to meet him to discuss it further.

Clive Lewis Portrait Clive Lewis (Norwich South) (Lab)
- View Speech - Hansard - - - Excerpts

I put on record my gratitude to the Home Secretary and her team for releasing the Home Office commissioned report, “The Historical Roots of the Windrush Scandal”, which concluded that 30 years of racist immigration legislation caused the Windrush scandal. Those now on the Opposition Benches spent three years trying to suppress that report. Will the Home Secretary meet me, other MPs and civil society representatives to discuss its recommendations?