---

Criminal Law (Amendment) (Protection of Property) Bill

My hon. Friend has made a good point. I suspect that Sir Ian Blair was caught unawares during a long interview on the ““Today”” programme, that he took the earliest opportunity to correct the impression that he may have given, and that he then fell in line with ACPO. Unfortunately, it seems to have taken the right hon. and learned Member for Folkestone and Hythe more than a decade to change his position. One can draw whatever conclusions one wishes from that. Clause 1(2) would introduce a new subsection (1A) to the Criminal Law Act 1967. The very first words in that proposed new subsection create problems. They are:"““Where a person uses force””." What is meant by ““person”” in these circumstances? It could be anybody. The provision is not confined to a householder, as it was in the Bill introduced by the hon. Member for Newark. It is not confined to a legal resident, or even to a security guard. ““A person”” could be anyone at all. It could be a squatter taking action against the lawful owner of the property who had come to try to remove his possessions or repossess the property. Under the Bill, a squatter would be entitled to use disproportionate force, so long as it was not excessive, against the legal owner of the property. Is that how the alleged party of law and order believes the Bill should be interpreted?