I recognise that my hon. Friend is trying to improve rather than retard the Bill. However, I put it to him, without wishing to nit-pick, that the unspoken premise of new clause 2 appears to be that there should be no requirement to prove intention because people must simply be assumed to intend the natural consequences of their actions. That is a dangerous working premise. In matters of argument, whether political or religious, the assumption of rationality is rather dangerous.
Racial and Religious Hatred Bill
Proceeding contribution from
John Bercow
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 11 July 2005.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Racial and Religious Hatred Bill.
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
436 c606 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 11:23:41 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_257270
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_257270
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_257270