My Lords, I am very grateful to everyone who has spoken and to the Minister for his reply. I am not grateful to the Minister for not replying to my specific points, which I have discussed with him and his advisers in private. That is not appropriate and I am sorry about that.
In terms of the principle of legal certainty, when what is at stake is free speech and property it is not satisfactory for a Minister to say to the House that the judge can read the debates. That is not good enough. The law should be clear, with proper criteria. The Minister indicated last time, and has not changed his position today, that the scheme is intended to apply only to heinous crimes at the grave end of the spectrum. That is not what the Bill says; it is what my amendment seeks to achieve. I wish to test the opinion of the House.
Division on Amendment 19.
Contents 59; Not-Contents 107.
Amendment 19 disagreed.
Moved by
Coroners and Justice Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Lester of Herne Hill
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Lords on Thursday, 5 November 2009.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Coroners and Justice Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
714 c419 
Session
2008-09
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 13:40:23 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_592826
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_592826
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_592826