I thank the noble Lords, Lord Neill and Lord Elystan-Morgan, and the Minister for their replies. I respectfully disagree with the noble Lord, Lord Neill, and agree with the noble Lord, Lord Elystan-Morgan, that the common law has developed since Palmer and that the statement of the law, as set out by Lord Chief Justice Woolf, is the more developed and up-to-date statement of the law of self-defence.
Those noble Lords who are anxiously awaiting the abolition of the common law offence of blasphemy will perhaps appreciate that, if we ever got around to codification of the criminal law, European legislation would seem minute in comparison. Even without legal aid, we have had a very interesting debate, which I shall need to study at some length. The Minister has given an undertaking and, in the light of his undertaking, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.
[Amendments Nos. 138A to 142 not moved.]
On Question, Whether Clause 128 shall stand part of the Bill?
Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Thomas of Gresford
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 5 March 2008.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
699 c1105 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 00:36:03 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_451810
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_451810
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_451810