Social Action, Responsibility and Heroism Bill Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Ministry of Justice

Social Action, Responsibility and Heroism Bill

Baroness Warnock Excerpts
Monday 15th December 2014

(10 years ago)

Lords Chamber
Read Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Lord Faulks Portrait Lord Faulks
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I will give the same answer that I gave in relation to the distinction between the Compensation Act and this Bill, which is that the Bill says that the court “must have regard”. That is a distinction. I said in Committee that there may well be an overlap between Clauses 2 and 4. I do not say that they are wholly distinct; they convey an accumulation of concepts which are readily understood, and a judge may find it possible to bear in mind both Clause 2 and Clause 4. That fact does not mean that Clause 4 cannot, in appropriate circumstances, serve a useful purpose.

Baroness Warnock Portrait Baroness Warnock (CB)
- Hansard - -

Before the noble Lord sits down, will he answer the question raised by my noble and learned friend regarding what exactly the word “heroic” adds to Clause 4? Could it not be left out? Intervening for the sake of saving somebody is surely enough. Is there any reason for having “heroism” or “heroically” either in the Title of the Bill or in Clause 4?

Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood Portrait Lord Brown of Eaton-under-Heywood
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

Before the Minister answers that, the words that are completely surplus here are “acting heroically by”. Why can it not read, “was intervening in an emergency”? Can the Minister whet our appetite as to whether there is any scenario when you can intervene in an emergency and so on, within the meaning of this clause, without acting heroically? If not, for heaven’s sake get rid of it.