---

Criminal Evidence (Witness Anonymity) Bill

I am most grateful for the response of the noble Lord, Lord Hunt. Our view is simply that Clause 4(3)(a), even in the context of subsection (6), is, as I said in my opening remarks, too low a test for the court to apply. Indeed, that is true not just of the expression in Clause 4(3)(a) but of the expression in Clause 4(6)(a), which refers not to ““serious injury”” but just to ““injury””. I am grateful to the Minister for agreeing to consider the words ““or financial loss”” at some later legislative stage. It is not hard for me to find examples of serious financial loss. For example, someone may be in possession of a very valuable item belonging to the witness—a picture or an item of furniture—and may threaten either to destroy it or to sell it into the market. I admit that destruction would be covered but not disposal by any other means. Alternatively, the person threatening the witness may owe the witness a great deal of money, which he says he will refuse to pay if the witness gives evidence. In my submission, those are serious considerations.