I think I had accepted what the Government had said: if you use the words “serious harm”, it would raise the threshold. However, I asked for assurances that the difficulties with the term “unnecessary suffering” will be sufficiently addressed rather than just being left. I had accepted the Government’s point that if you put in “serious harm” you might end up raising the threshold, but that still does not address the issue of the reference to “unnecessary suffering” with the implication, almost, that there can be such a thing as necessary suffering as far as children are concerned.
Serious Crime Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Rosser
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 14 October 2014.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Serious Crime Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
756 c160 
Session
2014-15
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2015-05-22 03:48:31 +0100
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2014-10-14/14101484000025
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2014-10-14/14101484000025
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Lords/2014-10-14/14101484000025