Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill

The hon. Gentleman quotes me very accurately, and that is the burden of my position. All hon. Members accept that the number of such cases going to court is tiny, and that there have been only a handful over the past 15 years. The problem that we face has to do with unnecessary and gratuitous investigations at a much earlier stage. I believe that we need to clarify the law, but that we must choose the best case law, rather than a compendium thereof. Highlighting that case law, as proposed in new clause 6, will be very effective. It will lead to a change in the way the law works, and that is precisely what I was seeking when I made my party conference speech. I should like to make two other brief points. First, the hon. Member for Arundel and South Downs (Nick Herbert) must be aware that the Joint Committee on Human Rights—one of whose members is a Conservative peer—has said that, in the criminal law, the ““grossly disproportionate”” use of force is outwith the EU convention on human rights. Secondly, he needs to deal with the very important point raised by the hon. Member for Cambridge (David Howarth). That hon. Gentleman has suggested—rightly, I think—that new clause 8 would give a court less flexibility in defending a victim of crime than would our new clause 6, under which the relevant tests are subjective.