All 2 Debates between Lord Judge and Earl Attlee

Mon 8th Nov 2021
Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill
Lords Chamber

Lords Hansard - part one & Committee stage part one
Mon 29th Oct 2018
Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Bill
Lords Chamber

Committee: 1st sitting (Hansard): House of Lords

Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill

Debate between Lord Judge and Earl Attlee
Earl Attlee Portrait Earl Attlee (Con)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, there is an obvious difference between an offence of careless driving and a health and safety offence: the health and safety offence is ongoing—someone is operating a dangerous machine, they have not done proper risk assessments—whereas an offence of careless driving can be a momentary lapse.

Lord Judge Portrait Lord Judge (CB)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, I wonder whether I should say that I am not going to make a second speech polishing up my first. I apologise to my noble and learned friend Lord Hope that I got my words in before he did.

Counter-Terrorism and Border Security Bill

Debate between Lord Judge and Earl Attlee
Earl Attlee Portrait Earl Attlee
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, several noble Lords have opposed Amendment 6, in my name, partially on the grounds that it does not define what “journalism” means. That definition is going to be a problem for my noble friend the Minister in due course, because she will tell us that journalists have nothing to fear from the new Act. It would be helpful if, in due course, she writes to noble Lords to tell us what she means by “journalism”.

Lord Judge Portrait Lord Judge (CB)
- Hansard - -

I suspect that the discussion about journalism and journalists focuses the Committee’s attention on these provisions. I share the views expressed in the House that there should be no special position for journalists. When they exercise their rights to freedom of expression they are simply exercising our rights to that freedom and to looking at other people’s expression. Does the current provision in the Bill run a serious—or any—risk that a genuine, bona fide journalist, examining the issues without any criminal intent at all, may be caught? If so, the provisions need to be re-examined; if not, not.