Counter-terrorism and Security Bill Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Home Office

Counter-terrorism and Security Bill

Dominic Grieve Excerpts
Tuesday 10th February 2015

(9 years, 9 months ago)

Commons Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness May of Maidenhead Portrait Mrs May
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The very reason we are debating the amendments is that the House has an opportunity to consider them, so the hon. Gentleman’s argument is completely false.

During the permission stage, the court would have the power to refuse permission for the order where prior permission was being sought, and in retrospective review cases, it would have the power to quash the order. During the statutory judicial review, the court would have the power not only to consider in detail and quash the specific in-country requirements placed on an individual, but to consider whether the relevant conditions for imposing the temporary exclusion order were and continued to be met. It could quash the whole order or direct that the Secretary of State revoke it. The amendments will ensure effective judicial scrutiny of the power, and I trust they provide sufficient reassurance to the House on this important issue.

Dominic Grieve Portrait Mr Dominic Grieve (Beaconsfield) (Con)
- Hansard - -

That does provide me with the reassurance I sought at an earlier stage, and I am grateful to my right hon. Friend for having listened carefully to the representations made here and in another place. They are most welcome and I believe will add considerably to the Bill’s legitimacy.

Baroness May of Maidenhead Portrait Mrs May
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I thank my right hon. and learned Friend for his comments and recognise that he raised these issues and questioned the original proposals when they were debated in this place.