Protection of Freedoms Bill

No, my Lords, it is very clear. In Clause 1, we are talking about any ““relevant authority”” and relevant authorities are listed in subsection (5). That could be extended. If it was extended, to use ““relevant authority”” in subsection (2) would not include paragraph (k) of subsection (5). The noble Lord is making a mountain out of a molehill. As I understand it, it is quite clear. Should it be extended, it would then be: "““A failure on the part of any person to act in accordance with the provision””," ““person”” in its legal sense would include paragraphs (a) to (j), but would also include paragraph (k) if my right honourable friend had extended those who are covered by it by using subsection 5(k) so to do.