Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from David Howarth (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 6 May 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill on Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill.


Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill

I accept that point. Amendments (a) and (c) try to deal with the problem seriously and they require a serious response from the Government. I do not believe that the Government's answer—on the one hand, the approach is unnecessary; on the other, it would have no effect—is convincing. The necessity derives from the need to tackle the problem of the absurd investigations. There is also an effect—it may not be as great as some people wish, but it is a definite effect. The choice for the House in tackling the problem of balance is the substantive words approach, but I do not believe that that works; or the guidance alone approach, which is not yet sufficient, although it has a certain promise, especially when the detail is produced; or the procedural approach. I am a little confused by the Conservative party's stance, which appears to favour the substantive approach on the one hand and the procedural route on the other. The Conservatives must decide between the two. Nevertheless, I hope that hon. Members will find an acceptable way forward that is also acceptable to the House of Lords.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
475 c612 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Disclosure of information Data protection Criminal proceedings Crime Crimes against the person Blasphemy Legal profession Incitement Legal opinion Freedom of expression Police Pay Powers Prisons Magistrates' courts Sentencing Training Religion Sexuality HM Prison Service Community orders Suspended sentences Homophobia
Legislation
Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill 2006-07 to 2007-08
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk