My right hon. Friend rightly says that in PII, because people do not like excluding all the evidence, there is a perfectly legitimate argument about how much we can gist and how much can be redacted, and then it can be put into the open court. But everything that does not get there is entirely left out; it is not available to claimant, judge, lawyers or anybody else. In a CMP, exactly the same thing can be done, because the judge will be required to consider how much we can gist, how much we can redact, and what can be shared with the defendant. The only difference is that in a CMP, the evidence, including, as my right hon. Friend said, some things that might be absolutely key to the case that cannot unfortunately be disclosed, can be considered by the judge. PII shuts out all that which is not possible to gist. With a CMP, there can be all the gisting and redaction that one wants, but all the evidence is considered.
Justice and Security Bill [Lords]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Clarke of Nottingham
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 4 March 2013.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Justice and Security Bill [Lords].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
559 c718 
Session
2012-13
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2021-07-28 11:40:37 +0100
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2013-03-04/13030437000050
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2013-03-04/13030437000050
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2013-03-04/13030437000050