Parliamentary Search

Proceeding contribution from Evan Harris (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 24 March 2009. It occurred during Debate on bill on Coroners and Justice Bill.

Coroners and Justice Bill

Let me try to explain why there is a difference. The religious saver specifies that abuse and ridicule are not covered by the offence. It is tautological but they are not. The Waddington amendment does not exclude ridicule or abuse, because they are already excluded, but purports, according to one interpretation, to allow the exclusion of intentional threatening incitement as long as it refers only to practice. That is the difference, and the hon. Gentleman must explain whether he understood the comments of my hon. Friend the Member for Cambridge (David Howarth) when he outlined the potential effect of new clause 11.

Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
490 c194 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Complaints Disclosure of information Data protection Databases Codes of practice Accountability Armed forces Alternatives to prison Coroners Damage Finance Homicide Government departments Discrimination Industrial accidents Immunity from prosecution Freedom of expression Offenders Private sector Personal records Protection Powers Public bodies Property Staff Paedophilia Scotland Rehabilitation Sentencing Standards Witnesses Sexuality Religious freedom Sanctions Reoffenders Information Commissioner's Office Homophobia Sentencing Council for England and Wales
Legislation
Coroners and Justice Bill 2008-09
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk