Victims and Courts Bill (Third sitting) Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Ministry of Justice
Kieran Mullan Portrait Dr Mullan
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

I direct the hon. Lady to the statute book and to the case law that has evolved around that phrase. If the courts, this Government or our previous Government did not think it was a meaningful distinction, I do not know why we would have it on the statute book. It was introduced to provide the greatest possible benefit to those using force, in terms of legal protection and understanding that they would not be unfairly or unduly judged as a result. As I said, it has been on the statute book for quite some time. It is a legally recognised phrase, as distinguished from “reasonable force”.

Kieran Mullan Portrait Dr Mullan
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

The hon. Member for Gloucester is chuntering; would he like to intervene? Did I say something that was factually incorrect?

Alex McIntyre Portrait Alex McIntyre
- Hansard - -

Does the hon. Gentleman accept that the short answer for his response to the hon. Member for South Devon is no?

Kieran Mullan Portrait Dr Mullan
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

As I said, it is on the statute book as a legally defined term. I struggle to understand why Members think it is on the statute book without any meaning. I have not heard any plans from the Government since the election to remove it.