text_body: --- DIVISION TITLE ---
  
  Terrorism Bill -  Clause 1 - Encouragement of Terrorism - "unforeseen recklessness"
  
  --- MOTION EFFECT ---
  
  
  
  Those voting Aye succeeded in changing <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmbills/055/06055.1-7.html#jE002"> Clause 1(1)</a> of the <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200506/cmbills/055/06055.i-iii.html"> Terrorism Bill</a> from: </p>
  
  
  <blockquote>A person commits an offence if (a) he publishes a statement or causes another to publish a statement on his behalf; and (b) ... he knows or... has reasonable grounds for believing that members of the public... are likely to understand it as a[n]... encouragement... of acts of terrorism...</blockquote>
  
  <p>to (in summary and rearrangement):</p>
  
  <p class="indent">(1) A person commits an offence if (a) he publishes a statement or causes another to publish a statement on his behalf; and (b) he intends his statement to be, or is reckless as to whether or not his statement would be, understood by members of the public to whom it is published as an encouragement of acts of terrorism.
  
  <blockquote>(1A) For the purposes of this section, the cases in which a person is taken as reckless includes any case in which he could not reasonably have failed to be aware of that likelihood. </blockquote>
  
  <p>Paragraph (1A) means it is still possible for someone else to decide you have encouraged terrorism, even if it was not your intention.  A speech in the debate outlining the recent legal disputes over this interpretation of the word "reckless" is <a href="http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debate/?id=2005-11-09a.395.0"> here</a>. </p>
  
  <p>Those voting No in this division were not saying they agreed with the original words; it is <a href="http://www.theyworkforyou.com/debate/?id=2005-11-09a.400.2"> procedurally necessary</a> for the No side to win for any other amendments to be considered. </p>
  
  <p><a href="http://publicwhip.org.uk/division.php?date=2005-11-02&number=73"> Division 73</a> and <a href="http://publicwhip.org.uk/division.php?date=2005-11-02&number=74"> Division 74</a> were previously held on this same issue on 2005-11-02.</p>
  
  
  
  --- COMMENTS AND NOTES ---
  
  (put thoughts and notes for other researchers here)
  