Member

The purpose of Amendment 422B is to ensure that Parliament has as much information as possible before a proscription order is made. During the Palestine Action case and subsequently, Ministers stressed that the proscription order had been endorsed by Parliament. That is strictly true, but it was an uninformed endorsement. That is necessarily the case, and I blame no Minister for that. It is not possible for Ministers to outline in open debate the considerations and information they have received in private which have led to the decision to proscribe, but they could give that information to the Intelligence and Security Committee, which is well versed in dealing with things of this kind. If this was done before the laying of the proscription order then the committee could make a report and this House would be much better informed. I recognise that the urgency of the matter may be such that the Secretary of State has to lay an order without being able to refer the matter to the committee. In that event, the Secretary of State could meet the committee to set out the facts in greater detail. The committee might then be in a position to report to this House. This is not a complete safeguard, but it is a great improvement on where we now are. It is in that spirit that I commend the amendment to your Lordships’ House.