The behaviour that will not be taken as harassment is private prayer. Other actions that may be taken—obstructing a person walking down the street was what my hon. Friend suggested earlier—will be in scope. What should not be in scope is a person thinking something in their head. That is the only defence on which we are trying to insist, and I invite Members to consider whether they want to pass a law that will ban people from thinking something. Other forms of harassment or obstruction will be in scope of the law. So I do not think the intention is to stop people praying—I do not think that is what the hon. Member for Ealing Central and Acton, the Government or indeed any of us want to do. We need to send a clear signal of the intention of Parliament through this amendment, and I commend my hon. Friend the Member for Northampton South (Andrew Lewer) for tabling it. I ask Members to consider that if they vote against it, they are voting to ban private prayer. Of course it is a special case and we are talking about tiny zones, and of course we can all sympathise with the intention of the clause, but the point is the principle of this—
Public Order Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Danny Kruger
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 7 March 2023.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Public Order Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
729 c226 
Session
2022-23
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-03-08 12:20:44 +0000
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2023-03-07/23030747000051
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2023-03-07/23030747000051
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2023-03-07/23030747000051