---

Protection of Freedoms Bill

The noble Baroness pointed to the words ““or otherwise”” at the end of the amendment. I may not have been paying sufficient attention to the argument, in which case I apologise, but if this matter is considered further perhaps she would take on board that within this definition the impairment is through only physical or mental disability or illness, and that the last five words are a description of what might cause the physical or mental disability or illness. Therefore, one cannot read ““or otherwise”” as extending the impairment. I repeat: the impairment is only through disability or illness. As I listened to the noble Baroness, I thought that she was asking us to read ““or otherwise”” as adding to ““disability or illness””, which I do not think it does.