Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Davidson of Glen Clova (Labour) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 23 April 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill on Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill.


Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill

My Lords, the amendment is straightforward in that it would simply strike out the clause. However, the Government suggest that, if that were done, it would risk undoing much of the good work that has been done in this House to deal with this area thus far. During the passage of the Bill, there has been considerable interest in the debate surrounding self-defence, which demonstrates that there are serious concerns about whether the current position is appropriate or sustainable. That is possibly an answer to the noble Earl, Lord Onslow, when he ventures the notion that no one, outside lawyers, will be particularly interested in this provision. The debate has spread beyond this House. One has heard fairly extreme legislative proposals, such as the amendments that we have been dealing with on gross disproportionality. Other proposals have sought to refine the government clause in the interests of more accurately reflecting the common law position, which we feel we have now done. However, very few have argued that no legislative action is necessary at all—until, I am bound to say, this afternoon. Indeed, the very fact that the matter keeps coming back—


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
700 c1527-8 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Disciplinary proceedings Data protection Criminal proceedings Crime Armed forces Crimes of violence Court orders Burglary Journalism Offenders Protest Newspaper press Religion Religious buildings Freedom of association Self-defence
Legislation
Ecclesiastical Courts Jurisdiction Act 1860
Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill 2006-07 to 2007-08
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk