Live Urgent Question

Download Subtitles

Transcript

:00:00. > :00:00.particularly those who served on the committee for both houses, and I

:00:00. > :00:07.would like to express my thanks to them for what they have done. I

:00:08. > :00:10.think the Secretary of State's courtesy will be appreciated across

:00:11. > :00:16.the house and I thank him for what he has just said. Order. To ask the

:00:17. > :00:26.Home Secretary to make a statement on the case of Jamal al-Harith.

:00:27. > :00:32.Thank you, Mr Speaker. At the outset, let me make it clear that

:00:33. > :00:36.the United Kingdom takes the security of its people and allies

:00:37. > :00:43.very seriously but will not hesitate to take action in the case of self

:00:44. > :00:46.defence. The Government strongly discourages people travelling to

:00:47. > :00:50.conflict zones. It is however the long-standing policy of successive

:00:51. > :00:53.governments not to comment on intelligence matters. The monitoring

:00:54. > :00:57.of individuals is an intelligence matter and the Government does not

:00:58. > :01:01.and cannot comment on individual cases. Neither can the Government

:01:02. > :01:09.comment on whether particular individuals have received

:01:10. > :01:22.consultation payments. In November 2010, the then Minister for Justice

:01:23. > :01:26.in informed the Government that... The details of that settlement were

:01:27. > :01:31.subject to legally binding, confidentiality agreements and we

:01:32. > :01:36.are therefore unable to confirm whether any specific individual

:01:37. > :01:38.received such a settlement. More broadly, the Government's priority

:01:39. > :01:42.is to dissuade people from travelling to areas of conflict in

:01:43. > :01:45.the first place and our strategy works to identify and support

:01:46. > :01:53.individuals at risk of radicalisation. In 2015, over 150

:01:54. > :01:57.attempted journeys were disrupted. The Government's process to provide

:01:58. > :02:03.support to individuals at risk of being drawn into terrorism was

:02:04. > :02:07.rolled out in 2012, there have been over 4000 interventions to prevent

:02:08. > :02:10.radicalisation. But we have been clear, we will seek to prosecute

:02:11. > :02:14.those who travel abroad to commit terrorist attacks and our brave men

:02:15. > :02:17.and women of the intelligence services and Lauren Forsman agencies

:02:18. > :02:26.work everyday to make so that the risk to our is minimised. Yvette

:02:27. > :02:31.Cooper. Mr Speaker, it is reported that Jamal al-Harith has died in a

:02:32. > :02:38.suicide attack in Mosul and in doing so has killed many others in an

:02:39. > :02:46.extremist regime. If these reports are accurate, he is a dangerous man

:02:47. > :02:50.involved in extremism and should be condemned from all accounts. It is

:02:51. > :02:53.reportedly receive a payment from the Government after concerns about

:02:54. > :03:00.defending the case that he took would lead to the revelation of

:03:01. > :03:04.intelligence and compromising national security. The former

:03:05. > :03:08.reviewer of counterterrorism has provided information about this case

:03:09. > :03:12.and so too has the former Home Secretary. I should just say to the

:03:13. > :03:14.Minister that everyone understands there will be information that

:03:15. > :03:22.cannot be revealed because of intelligence reasons, however he has

:03:23. > :03:27.provided far too little about such a serious case. Can he confirm whether

:03:28. > :03:31.Mr Jamal al-Harith was made any payment and also notwithstanding the

:03:32. > :03:36.subsequent welcome legislation which had cross-party support to tighten

:03:37. > :03:39.the law, would he agree that people across the country would feel

:03:40. > :03:44.sickened that the idea of large payments being made to someone who

:03:45. > :03:51.may have been involved in serious terrorist activity? We know that Mr

:03:52. > :03:56.al-Harith was subjected terrorist monitoring of the 2004. Was he

:03:57. > :03:59.subject to monitoring between 2010 when the payments were reportedly

:04:00. > :04:10.made and leaving the country in 2014? Was he considered for a patrol

:04:11. > :04:15.order or a TPIM? It is reported that al-Harith left to join Isil in 2014.

:04:16. > :04:20.Was he being monitored at that time? Was he on any order watch list at

:04:21. > :04:23.the time? The reason for as asking that question is because we want to

:04:24. > :04:28.know legitimately whether this was lack of intelligence in his case or

:04:29. > :04:31.whether there was some failure in the border watchlist system, in

:04:32. > :04:36.which case there are some legitimate questions for this house to pursue.

:04:37. > :04:41.What happened about the payment that was allegedly made to Mr al-Harith

:04:42. > :04:46.and does the Government know whether any of that money was subsequently

:04:47. > :04:50.used to fund extremist activity? Was there any monitoring in place for

:04:51. > :04:55.any of these compensation cases that took place? And has there been any

:04:56. > :05:00.attempt since Mr al-Harith left for Syria and Iraq to recover any of the

:05:01. > :05:04.payments that have been made? Is any of that payment left now? And can

:05:05. > :05:08.the Minister at least say whether the Government is now reviewing this

:05:09. > :05:13.case and will at least provide a report to the intelligence and

:05:14. > :05:16.Security committee who will be able to listen to all the questions

:05:17. > :05:20.around intelligence so that we can understand whether such a serious

:05:21. > :05:24.case has been properly pursued and that every possible action has been

:05:25. > :05:26.taken both on the half of our national security and on the half of

:05:27. > :05:36.the British taxpayer. Can I thank the right honourable

:05:37. > :05:40.lady for her questions, can I also just say, like air unlike my

:05:41. > :05:47.constituents we will be outweighed and is appointed by the sums of

:05:48. > :05:51.money that had been paid, but I can't comment on the individual

:05:52. > :05:55.cases, and unlike former Home Secretary is the government is bound

:05:56. > :06:01.by its legal obligations that it has made and we cannot break those legal

:06:02. > :06:06.commitments, but I can say that some of the one mobility that led us to

:06:07. > :06:11.have do pay those damages, occurred when she was a member of the Labour

:06:12. > :06:15.government and when those individuals brought claims against

:06:16. > :06:20.us. I think it is important that we recognise that that is why some of

:06:21. > :06:43.these claims at be paid out. And that is

:06:44. > :06:46.why in outrageous sums of money that is reported, this government and the

:06:47. > :06:48.Coalition government, brought forward the consolidated guidance,

:06:49. > :06:50.David Cameron brought forward, to make sure that our intelligence

:06:51. > :06:53.services act within the law and make sure that they get the full support

:06:54. > :06:56.of the law in order to do their job and that is also why we brought

:06:57. > :06:58.forward the Justice and Security act 2013 to make sure that in future

:06:59. > :07:01.claims brought by such people held in quite an obey in 2004 can be

:07:02. > :07:03.challenged in court with out revealing sensitive intelligent

:07:04. > :07:05.information and therefore allow us to defend many of those claims, and

:07:06. > :07:07.also why that act brought in stronger powers for the intelligence

:07:08. > :07:11.and Security committee in order that that committee can investigate such

:07:12. > :07:15.incidents and make sure that it gives confidence to this House that

:07:16. > :07:19.such events are properly investigated lessons I learned that

:07:20. > :07:23.they need to be, but also allegations can be put to rest if

:07:24. > :07:28.they are found to be false. That happen as a result of these type of

:07:29. > :07:30.payment and that was done under the Coalition government of David

:07:31. > :07:38.Cameron to make sure that we minimised the risk of it ever

:07:39. > :07:42.happening again. I note that you are aware that before I came to this

:07:43. > :07:46.place I worked as a government lawyer, although I didn't work on

:07:47. > :07:51.this case specifically colleagues in the Department of which I worked

:07:52. > :08:02.where involved of course in this case... Know it is not! In this

:08:03. > :08:07.country we have a proud tradition of law and law that supports not only

:08:08. > :08:11.people who are attracted to the General people, but also people in

:08:12. > :08:16.whom the general public would not always have sympathy, the question I

:08:17. > :08:21.would like to put the Minister is how much and to what extent, has he

:08:22. > :08:26.worked and has this government worked to enable the rule of law to

:08:27. > :08:31.be upheld to enable the secret courts built to come into effect so

:08:32. > :08:36.that we can study these cases properly? Thank you. I am grateful

:08:37. > :08:42.to my honourable friend for her question. By introducing

:08:43. > :08:46.consolidated guidance to guide our intelligence services when they

:08:47. > :08:52.operate abroad, by introducing the act that I referred to and beefing

:08:53. > :08:59.up the ISC, all of that put simply is a much more robust structure, so

:09:00. > :09:03.that we are not the victim of people coming along and trying to sue us

:09:04. > :09:07.for actions we may all may not have taken. That is the most important

:09:08. > :09:11.part of it but also it is important to point out to the House that we

:09:12. > :09:16.will act in accordance with our inherent duty and right of self

:09:17. > :09:19.defence. What we will always put first is the defence of our citizens

:09:20. > :09:28.and our nation and make sure that we do that is the best of our ability.

:09:29. > :09:32.Terrorism is the scourge of modern democracies, it has meant that the

:09:33. > :09:36.front line of international conflict has moved from the battlefield to

:09:37. > :09:41.our homes and high streets, therefore there will be natural

:09:42. > :09:46.public concern about the case of Jamal Al-Harith, who was allegedly

:09:47. > :09:49.played 1 million in compensation by the UK Government following his

:09:50. > :09:54.incarceration in quite an obey. There will be natural public

:09:55. > :09:59.concerns that the Minister has chosen to hide behind the notion of

:10:00. > :10:07.sense of intelligence to fail to answer even the most simple factual

:10:08. > :10:11.question about this case. I repeat, was there any payment, we do not

:10:12. > :10:16.need to know how much, but was there any payment, is there any truth in

:10:17. > :10:25.the idea that the settlement was designed to stop Al-Harith making an

:10:26. > :10:31.embarrassing allegations about the torturing of the UK citizen? Given

:10:32. > :10:37.the monitoring of British citizens are how was he able to leave the

:10:38. > :10:43.country in travel to Sydney in 2014 and will the government rebuke this

:10:44. > :10:48.case and refer it to the security and intelligence select committee

:10:49. > :10:52.which we believe would be the appropriate and secret method of

:10:53. > :11:00.dealing with these very important issues? Dashed travel to Syria. Of

:11:01. > :11:06.course the intelligence committee has the power, now, because of our

:11:07. > :11:09.acts to make sure that it has the power to properly investigate these

:11:10. > :11:13.issues and members of that committee will have been listening to this

:11:14. > :11:17.debate and it is highly for them to choose what they want to invest

:11:18. > :11:22.about eight, but if they choose to we will of course comply as we are

:11:23. > :11:26.obliged to and as we wish to do. And I think that is very important to do

:11:27. > :11:31.that. The right honourable lady asked me to disclose intelligence,

:11:32. > :11:35.operations concerning an individual I cannot do that, that has never

:11:36. > :11:39.been the practice of this government, the last government and

:11:40. > :11:43.the government before, and we are not hiding behind that phrase, we

:11:44. > :11:48.are actually having to oblige ourselves in line with the legally

:11:49. > :11:52.binding confidentiality agreement made between Her Majesty's

:11:53. > :11:57.government and the parties involved. I am sure that she is not trying to

:11:58. > :12:05.encourage me to break the law and reveal details about compensation!

:12:06. > :12:12.It is reported that around ?20 million has been paid to form a

:12:13. > :12:17.one-time obey detainees, 16 in number. This morning Lord Blunkett

:12:18. > :12:21.suggested that that Sun should be formally reviewed, since the public

:12:22. > :12:28.will be dismayed and particularly concerned if any of that money has

:12:29. > :12:36.gone to fund terrorism, Willie undertake... My right honourable

:12:37. > :12:40.friend raises an important point about the destination about what

:12:41. > :12:45.happens to any money paid individuals, one of the reasons we

:12:46. > :12:50.took through the criminal finance Bill is to give is even more powers

:12:51. > :12:54.to track money destined for terrorism and to deal with it. I

:12:55. > :12:59.think that that is incredibly important. The Commons of the former

:13:00. > :13:04.Home Secretary, Mr Blunkett, is of course the matter they him, no doubt

:13:05. > :13:07.he may be questioned by intelligence and Security committee about what

:13:08. > :13:13.role he and his colleagues took in making sure that British citizens'

:13:14. > :13:16.interests where protected when they were in Guantanamo Bay at the time

:13:17. > :13:24.which may have let these claims in the first place. Pan I associate

:13:25. > :13:27.myself with comments of the honourable member for Pontefract and

:13:28. > :13:31.Casa board and state that the SNP are committed to protecting the

:13:32. > :13:35.people of Scotland and keeping our communities safe whilst recognising

:13:36. > :13:39.that this needs to be balanced with the protection of Civil Liberties.

:13:40. > :13:44.We recognised the way in which people are becoming radicalised and

:13:45. > :13:49.constantly of Olding Ali much remain vigilant. Police forces across

:13:50. > :13:52.Scotland have been extremely vigilant and many are working

:13:53. > :13:56.closely with the Scottish Muslim community to prevent violent

:13:57. > :14:01.extremism and radicalism, however it has been suggested that the reason

:14:02. > :14:06.that Jamal Al-Harith was able to travel to Mosul was due to the Home

:14:07. > :14:09.Office under the current Prime Minister weaken surveillance of

:14:10. > :14:15.terror suspects due to issues of resource. What will this government

:14:16. > :14:18.do to meet this duty of care and vigilance in the monitoring those

:14:19. > :14:21.who have been vulnerable to radicalisation and address any

:14:22. > :14:28.issues of resource in order to do this effectively? Can I just say to

:14:29. > :14:32.the honourable lady that in my time as security minister how impressed I

:14:33. > :14:35.have been with the Scottish police work across the United Kingdom to

:14:36. > :14:39.put that United Kingdom citizens and people living in Scotland from the

:14:40. > :14:44.threat of terrorism and I have been to visit them and nowhere in the

:14:45. > :14:47.event and the filling the contest are that we agreed between the UK

:14:48. > :14:50.Government and the Scottish Government is why we are seeing in

:14:51. > :14:54.many areas people being prevented from travelling and persuaded away

:14:55. > :14:58.from radicalisation. I am grateful for the Scottish Government and its

:14:59. > :15:03.role in making sure that people are safer in Scotland. Of course

:15:04. > :15:08.everything we do is within the rule of law, the rights of the country to

:15:09. > :15:11.take action in self defence means that I would urge members to look at

:15:12. > :15:14.the government memorandum that was written to the joint community of

:15:15. > :15:18.human rights whether government restated U of when it is legally

:15:19. > :15:23.able to take action against individuals, as do the funding point

:15:24. > :15:31.that the honourable lady raises, we have increased our funding in

:15:32. > :15:38.Prevent year on in so that we put a focus on persuading people, as much

:15:39. > :15:45.as we put into the areas of the shoe. Mr Speaker, I was a strong

:15:46. > :15:49.supporter of the 2030 act which was bitterly opposed by elements in this

:15:50. > :15:53.House, some of them I am sorry to say on our own benches, but it is

:15:54. > :15:56.quite a mother step in the right direction. Would my honourable

:15:57. > :15:59.friend except that in the absolute heart of the concept of will look

:16:00. > :16:07.law is public confidence in the system? The current framework of

:16:08. > :16:11.human rights as it affects areas like our ability to monitor suspects

:16:12. > :16:18.is unsatisfactory and it is one more reason why we have to review human

:16:19. > :16:22.rights law in this country? I hear the points, but I would just remind

:16:23. > :16:26.him that collectively this House took through the investigatory

:16:27. > :16:30.Powers act with a huge amount of amendments tabled from all sides

:16:31. > :16:36.that the government conceded on and we worked across parties to deliver

:16:37. > :16:39.that we believe is a robust and successful piece of legislation that

:16:40. > :16:43.can comply with human rights obligations bought also make sure

:16:44. > :16:48.that our people are kept safe and give the powers to intelligence

:16:49. > :16:54.services that they need in the 21st-century to face the fact that

:16:55. > :16:57.posed against this, the tables. Mr Speaker, the root cause of the

:16:58. > :17:03.problem here is the operation of the date pension time, Guantanamo Bay,

:17:04. > :17:08.the government previously supported President Obama's as missing see it

:17:09. > :17:13.close, the current president said he was going to load it up with some

:17:14. > :17:21.bad dudes, does the government now support President Obama's position

:17:22. > :17:24.of president Trump's position? We should see what the actions are in

:17:25. > :17:30.themselves before we comment on the USA. As a young officer in Northern

:17:31. > :17:33.Ireland is that torture, and degrading people doesn't like and

:17:34. > :17:36.doesn't get the results that you want and usually extends conflict

:17:37. > :17:41.and people should know that the use of torture will not be tolerated and

:17:42. > :17:45.that is why I was delighted in the criminal finance Bill on Tuesday to

:17:46. > :17:47.introduce a new power to allow the government and law enforcement

:17:48. > :17:52.agents to freeze assets of people guilty of human rights abuse

:17:53. > :17:59.anywhere in the world. Mr Speaker I'm grateful you calling me in this

:18:00. > :18:05.important question. I was an Army officer servicing and though I was

:18:06. > :18:09.not aware of the particular incident arising around this case I am aware

:18:10. > :18:15.of the situation that could have caused rise to it and I welcome the

:18:16. > :18:19.decision of David Blunkett. It is a difficult decision to know when and

:18:20. > :18:25.how to put evidence in the public field that could endanger the lives

:18:26. > :18:28.of fellow citizens, he took a difficult decision and perhaps

:18:29. > :18:32.resulted in a payment that none of us, letters be honest comfortable

:18:33. > :18:37.with, but if that payments saved the lives of others by not revealing

:18:38. > :18:41.sources, it was the right decision politically and morally. We should

:18:42. > :18:45.defend him. I would ask the Minister who is in his place to talk about,

:18:46. > :18:49.rather than that decision the changes that have happened that

:18:50. > :18:54.means that instead of playing those payments, today we can have a proper

:18:55. > :18:58.trial, in a closed court admittedly, to hold the evidence to account and

:18:59. > :19:06.to see what the real decision should be. My honourable friend is right,

:19:07. > :19:09.at the heart of some of this was the inability for us to test the

:19:10. > :19:14.allegations in an open court that were being put to us and that is why

:19:15. > :19:17.we put forward the Justice and Security act in 2013 which brought

:19:18. > :19:22.in the closed material proceedings and has also the swords is the beat

:19:23. > :19:27.of intelligence and Security committee to make sure that that

:19:28. > :19:30.wasn't a used or any other issues. I think we shouldn't forget there are

:19:31. > :19:34.many people in this House who opposed this act which would have

:19:35. > :19:42.left us facing even more claims, potentially pay-outs.

:19:43. > :19:51.Understandably there is much concern about public money being given to

:19:52. > :19:58.those engaging in terrorism, and obviously we all deplore it. But

:19:59. > :20:01.those of us who campaigned against British nationals being held in

:20:02. > :20:08.Guantanamo Bay are not going to offer any apology, that we were

:20:09. > :20:15.right to campaign, and if people are suspected of terrorist offences, if

:20:16. > :20:29.there is evidence. -- if there is evidence, they should be tried.

:20:30. > :20:36.I'm not going to ask the honourable member to apologise for campaigning

:20:37. > :20:41.on Guantanamo Bay. The best place for these things to happen is in a

:20:42. > :20:46.court of law, with evidence presented. I sat on his bench is

:20:47. > :20:50.listening to a labour company -- Government constantly trying to make

:20:51. > :20:57.the intelligence with evidence, I think him and I were in the same

:20:58. > :21:01.division lobbies. It is my long held experience that you do it in a court

:21:02. > :21:12.of law, with the rule of law and with appropriate evidence.

:21:13. > :21:16.Following on from what my honourable friend said, will the Minister say

:21:17. > :21:21.if the Government is exploring any options to recover the compensation

:21:22. > :21:26.paid to people from Guantanamo Bay? The taxpayers have been ripped off,

:21:27. > :21:29.terrorists have prospered from the appalling activities, and the public

:21:30. > :21:34.are rightly disgusted and they want to know what the Government is

:21:35. > :21:37.trying to do to rectify that. My honourable friend makes a valid

:21:38. > :21:42.point, and I will go from here and make sure that where we have legally

:21:43. > :21:47.binding agreements, they are currently monitored, and where there

:21:48. > :21:51.is a breach, we will recover any monies we can. The British public

:21:52. > :21:56.will be completely bewildered by the lack of information the Minister has

:21:57. > :22:01.provided for us today. This is not simply an issue of the individual

:22:02. > :22:06.case, but it is a policy issue we need to reflect on. The debate is

:22:07. > :22:11.already raging out there, with a lot of misinformation. There are issues

:22:12. > :22:17.the Minister needs to answer on what the monitoring was, is he confident

:22:18. > :22:22.we are monitoring our suspects? How are we monitoring people's -- people

:22:23. > :22:26.through the Monday -- money-laundering laws we have, to

:22:27. > :22:31.monitor any changes in behaviour? The Minister said the Government is

:22:32. > :22:38.discouraging people from travelling to Syria. It looks to the British

:22:39. > :22:42.public like they have funded it. It is a regrettable part, Mr Speaker,

:22:43. > :22:46.of the operation of the security services and often are police, that

:22:47. > :22:51.we cannot saying about our successes as much as we would like. Every day

:22:52. > :22:56.we managed to prevent people at the border going across to do harm,

:22:57. > :23:00.either within Europe or further afield, we often have to do this

:23:01. > :23:07.based on intelligence we cannot reveal, but we use the powers we

:23:08. > :23:11.have in order to do that. There are occasions where we have to discuss

:23:12. > :23:16.whether we could have done more or less. That is why we give more power

:23:17. > :23:20.to the Intelligence and Security Committee in this House, so we could

:23:21. > :23:24.ask all the deep searching questions without putting at risk agents,

:23:25. > :23:28.methods, capabilities and technologies, that we need so

:23:29. > :23:36.diligently to protect, in order to make sure that more and more people

:23:37. > :23:40.are kept safe, from an ever more determined group of terrorists.

:23:41. > :23:44.There was a long campaign to return British citizens from Guantanamo Bay

:23:45. > :23:47.and for them to face a proper trial. Does the Minister share my

:23:48. > :23:51.disappointment that more effort was not made to see how more sensitive

:23:52. > :23:56.information could not be held in camera, and would he confirmed that

:23:57. > :24:03.that Laguna has since been addressed by the Government? Guantanamo Bay

:24:04. > :24:10.goes back way before the Coalition Government got into power, it took

:24:11. > :24:14.literally from 2010, 2011 when we started making plans for the Justice

:24:15. > :24:19.Security act, to do that, I think the questions for what was done

:24:20. > :24:24.before is a matter for a former Government. Can I does associate

:24:25. > :24:31.myself from these disgraceful attacks -- attacks on campaigning to

:24:32. > :24:34.release British suspects from Guantanamo Bay. Lord Carlile has

:24:35. > :24:40.stated that Jamal Al-Harith and others were paid compensation to

:24:41. > :24:45.prevent the release of security information. It is a bit late for

:24:46. > :24:49.the Minister now to rest on confidentiality. Can he tell as

:24:50. > :24:53.this, what was the date of the confidentiality Clause which the

:24:54. > :25:02.Minister was citing, or is that also confidential? First of all, perhaps

:25:03. > :25:06.I could respond to the right honourable gentleman's point about

:25:07. > :25:10.the attacks on the Daily Mail. I don't think anybody has heard from

:25:11. > :25:19.this dispatch box and attack on the Daily Mail. As I said in my answer,

:25:20. > :25:21.November 2010 we made a legal -- legally binding confidentiality

:25:22. > :25:29.agreement. The keyword "Legally binding", which I'm sure he will

:25:30. > :25:33.understand but an obligation on us, it doesn't put an obligation on

:25:34. > :25:38.former Home Secretary is by the sounds of things, but on this

:25:39. > :25:42.Government, and should it even be an SNP Government, they would be

:25:43. > :25:47.legally obliged to stick to the confidentiality agreement, and he

:25:48. > :25:51.knows it. Does my honourable friend agree that as there were 16

:25:52. > :25:58.applications for closed material proceedings in the first two years

:25:59. > :26:02.after the passing of the Justice and Security act 2013, that potentially

:26:03. > :26:07.millions of pounds of British taxpayers' money has been saved

:26:08. > :26:15.simply because the security services are now free to present the evidence

:26:16. > :26:19.that they have? I think, hopefully, the closed material proceedings are

:26:20. > :26:24.doing what we wanted, which is to see of vexatious claims, test the

:26:25. > :26:27.evidence, and make sure that where the allegations are unfounded, the

:26:28. > :26:33.UK Government is not vulnerable to paying out money or compensation.

:26:34. > :26:38.The Minister has admitted that the Government he is a member of has

:26:39. > :26:43.made these payments. I accept his point about confidentiality, but can

:26:44. > :26:46.I asked him a simple question. What was the decision-making process in

:26:47. > :26:52.agreeing these payments? Which ministers agree to these payments?

:26:53. > :26:54.That the Member for Maidenhead, the current climate Mr, when she was

:26:55. > :27:03.Home Secretary, agreed to them, or is that banned by the confidentially

:27:04. > :27:07.agreement? The best thing to do is to write to the honourable member. I

:27:08. > :27:10.was the Parliamentary Private Secretary to the right honourable

:27:11. > :27:14.member for Rushcliffe in the Ministry of Justice. If I said that

:27:15. > :27:20.my memory of the time was that it was the Ministry of Justice or the

:27:21. > :27:23.Government, I may be misleading the House inadvertently. The best thing

:27:24. > :27:28.is to write accurately, but we all take responsibility, the whole

:27:29. > :27:34.Government stands by its legally binding commitment. Does my

:27:35. > :27:38.honourable friend not agree that the best way to deal with tragic cases

:27:39. > :27:44.like this, and the many other cases that have happened of this nature,

:27:45. > :27:49.is to prevent radicalisation in the first place? Once radicalisation's

:27:50. > :27:53.happen, when it is bought our intelligence services and border

:27:54. > :27:54.officials, and work internationalisation --

:27:55. > :27:59.internationally with other countries to deal with the consequences. My

:28:00. > :28:04.honourable friend makes an important point, but the whole way we can

:28:05. > :28:12.tackle this thread is by working together but internally in the UK,

:28:13. > :28:16.at our borders, between all the agencies, and our international

:28:17. > :28:20.partners, which we do more and more to make sure that when people are

:28:21. > :28:23.the threatened to come to this country or when they threaten to

:28:24. > :28:32.leave and do harm elsewhere, that the best our ability we deterred

:28:33. > :28:36.them and deal with them. It is a pity we have not heard any regret

:28:37. > :28:41.from the Labour Party, who lobbied intensely to have this dangerous

:28:42. > :28:47.terrorist released in 2004, but given the fact that he was on the

:28:48. > :28:51.loose, can the Minister explain why and how our security was so slack

:28:52. > :28:56.that he was able to lead this country, he was able to use the

:28:57. > :29:01.funds which he has had available to him to finance terrorism to go and

:29:02. > :29:08.kill people? The honourable member knows from his own personal

:29:09. > :29:11.experience the efforts that go into countering terrorism. The resource,

:29:12. > :29:17.the man hours, and indeed the risk that are taken. -- the risks. He

:29:18. > :29:21.will also know as a member in Northern Ireland but it is an easier

:29:22. > :29:24.said than done job. It is very hard dealing with all the threats every

:29:25. > :29:28.day, and people have to make judgments. I think we need to

:29:29. > :29:34.understand that our successes are the issues we can rarely advertise,

:29:35. > :29:41.and unfortunately in some cases people choose to focus on areas that

:29:42. > :29:43.we have, you know, have come to light recently. It is really

:29:44. > :29:48.important I think to remember that people get -- take in good faith

:29:49. > :29:53.judgment calls to make sure that we keep people safe. It is not an easy

:29:54. > :29:56.thing to do, and I have the highest regard for our intelligence services

:29:57. > :30:03.and police, who have to make life or death decisions every day, without

:30:04. > :30:07.any reward, recognition or benefit. Does my honourable friend agree that

:30:08. > :30:11.this case shows the moral, legal and security dilemmas thrown up when

:30:12. > :30:15.someone is suspected of terrorism or intending to commit an act of

:30:16. > :30:20.terror, but there is insufficient evidence to conflict them? There

:30:21. > :30:24.were loud protests in favour of closing Guantanamo Bay, and now I

:30:25. > :30:30.cry when a former Guantanamo Bay detainee goes on and commits an act

:30:31. > :30:40.of terror. -- now an outcry. There is a balance not only about how we

:30:41. > :30:44.live -- live in our society, it implies an element of open borders.

:30:45. > :30:48.It is also about the balance between the rights of individuals and the

:30:49. > :30:53.rights of the state to interfere in people's lives. It is a very tricky

:30:54. > :30:58.balance, and it is a life balance that is made as I say every day, and

:30:59. > :31:02.we do it within the rule of law, and we are grateful as any Government

:31:03. > :31:07.when we get the support of the House to improve those measures, such as

:31:08. > :31:19.the Justice and Security act, that improved accountability of some of

:31:20. > :31:23.our law enforcement agencies, and I think that is the real challenge,

:31:24. > :31:26.and it will not change no matter who is sitting on the Treasury benches.

:31:27. > :31:29.It is a balance we always have to try to achieve to do better now of

:31:30. > :31:32.-- with. The Minister did not answer the question, is anybody currently

:31:33. > :31:37.on a TPIM? As we know UK citizens have travelled to fight for Di Ash

:31:38. > :31:45.and return to this country, can I say, I am very surprised indeed if

:31:46. > :31:49.there are not some people on TPIM to make sure that we are protecting the

:31:50. > :31:56.people in this country? Every year there is a manual bulletin of

:31:57. > :32:03.numbers of TPIMs. I think nine was the latest number or maybe sex. It's

:32:04. > :32:06.six, there we are. But will obviously be refreshed, and when

:32:07. > :32:12.that is published you were able to see the next -- latest number. Can I

:32:13. > :32:18.assure the honourable lady that TPIMs is one of the tools we use to

:32:19. > :32:22.make sure people are monitored or deterred from taking dangerous

:32:23. > :32:31.action. It is just one tool, we use it when we need to, and we will

:32:32. > :32:38.continue to do so. Thank you, Mr Speaker. I thank my right honourable

:32:39. > :32:44.friend for dragging the Home Office here. Obviously totally ill

:32:45. > :32:50.prepared, no understanding of this real issue, and no concern about

:32:51. > :32:56.what has happened. The former Home Secretary, the now Prime Minister,

:32:57. > :33:00.cut 50% of our border staff, and has allowed this individual to go

:33:01. > :33:05.through those gates unhindered. Also the fact that the measures they have

:33:06. > :33:11.brought in has also affected, actually there was no sign of this

:33:12. > :33:13.individual. It is no good hiding behind the security services, but

:33:14. > :33:19.why hasn't Government dealt with this issue? I'm grateful to the

:33:20. > :33:23.honourable member for his question. Although he might like to reflect on

:33:24. > :33:27.some of his comments. First of all, it was this Government who brought

:33:28. > :33:40.in extra checks which did not exist under his Government. When you use

:33:41. > :33:45.an ego, it is not unmonitored, -- of course e-gates are monitored. Nobody

:33:46. > :33:49.was dragged to this House, like the sound of my own voice, I am happy to

:33:50. > :33:57.stay here all afternoon if he wants to answer questions on the issue. It

:33:58. > :34:00.is not good enough for the Minister to simply hide behind intelligence

:34:01. > :34:04.as an excuse for not answering the most basic questions about this

:34:05. > :34:09.dreadful case, so let me try a policy question. What assessment has

:34:10. > :34:13.he made the impact on the Coalition Government's disastrous decision to

:34:14. > :34:19.scrap Labour's control orders, and his ability to monitor people like

:34:20. > :34:23.this? First of all, the right honourable gentleman forgets the

:34:24. > :34:27.position of the control orders were before the courts, because funnily

:34:28. > :34:30.enough as I pointed out earlier, his Government didn't seem to have

:34:31. > :34:34.acquired the right regard for the Human Rights Act or the rule of law

:34:35. > :34:43.as they should, and were constantly seeing their measures struck down.

:34:44. > :34:46.We do believe TPIMs are a good policy, we will use them wherever we

:34:47. > :34:51.can and wherever we are needing to, to make sure that we do everything

:34:52. > :34:55.to keep people under control who pose a threat, and so far we have

:34:56. > :35:02.not abandoned that or failed to use it when the need presents itself.

:35:03. > :35:06.Can the Minister reassures that he knows the current status and

:35:07. > :35:15.whereabouts of the other three people released from what can obey

:35:16. > :35:18.alongside Mr Al-Harith in 2004? Well, I'm going to say to the right

:35:19. > :35:22.honourable gentleman that I cannot comment on the level of our

:35:23. > :35:27.operations or knowledge or surveillance, however I can reassure

:35:28. > :35:32.him that as I have said the powerful intelligence and Security permission

:35:33. > :35:34.can ask all those details and investigate those issues

:35:35. > :35:38.unilaterally, to make sure that if they need those answers they can get

:35:39. > :35:44.them and reassure the House whether enough is being done or not enough.

:35:45. > :35:48.Can I welcome the Minister's commitment to my phone from North

:35:49. > :35:52.Durham to write to him and tell him which minister took the decision

:35:53. > :35:56.about the compensation? He did mention the introduction of exit

:35:57. > :36:01.checks and lead this individual subject to one when he left the

:36:02. > :36:05.country, can he give an account on the government's point of view in

:36:06. > :36:10.this case of what happened after that individual left the country? As

:36:11. > :36:14.I said at the beginning of my answer, I cannot comment on the

:36:15. > :36:17.individual case or on the intelligence behind it, but as I

:36:18. > :36:24.have said the intelligence Security committee is perfectly able to look

:36:25. > :36:29.into that, I would also say that the idea of which particular minister

:36:30. > :36:34.did it, is likely a red herring, the United Kingdom government was

:36:35. > :36:39.obliged to make certain agreements because of the vulnerability it

:36:40. > :36:42.found itself under as a result of 2004 and the allegations divide when

:36:43. > :36:50.a number of the people in your benches were members of that

:36:51. > :36:58.government. Not on my benches. In fact I do not have the bench. But,

:36:59. > :37:02.very comfortable chair. Basically, when the Prime Minister was Home

:37:03. > :37:05.Secretary and all the Justice Secretary agreed warmly medium

:37:06. > :37:11.pounds or thereabouts, for a man who went on to commit a significant

:37:12. > :37:15.terrorist act which cover many people. Why the Minister thinks that

:37:16. > :37:19.he can hide behind legal confidentiality and security so as

:37:20. > :37:23.not to even assuage any of the basics concerns that all of our

:37:24. > :37:28.voters will have is a mystery to me. The man is dead for a start and

:37:29. > :37:33.secondly the Bill of Rights says that no proceeding in Parliament

:37:34. > :37:37.shall be impeached or questions by any Court of law, he can tell us

:37:38. > :37:42.anything he wants today if only he had the courage to do so. Mr Speaker

:37:43. > :37:51.they always say the best the last, the honourable member absolutely

:37:52. > :37:59.uses the word himself, "Legally" it seems to have missed his attention,

:38:00. > :38:03.if he wants to investigate more than I think I would prefer him to the

:38:04. > :38:06.intelligence and Security committee who have all the powers that this

:38:07. > :38:09.government gave them and the Coalition governments to make sure

:38:10. > :38:17.that they get the bottom of the issues. Thank you. Or death,

:38:18. > :38:25.business question. Thank you, --- or death. Could the Leader of the House

:38:26. > :38:30.gives the forthcoming business. The business the next week will be as

:38:31. > :38:34.follows, estimates date Monday the... There will be a debate on

:38:35. > :38:39.future drug prevention followed by a debate on health and social care.

:38:40. > :38:42.Tuesday the 28th of that be, there will be a debate on the government's

:38:43. > :38:44.productivity plan