Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Bill

I do not know which medieval philosopher referred to angels dancing on the head of a pin. I do not think anyone has ever found him, but I am grateful to the Minister for using that phrase. I am a little worried that we may actually be dancing on the point of a pin, which is much more painful. Everyone knows what ““significant”” means. One uses the phrases ““statistically significant”” and ““significant profits””, and recently we have sadly heard of a ““significant number of redundancies””. ““Significant”” is well known and well understood. I think that ““substantial”” is a much more difficult word, although it conveys a high level of meaning in its appearance in Clause 1(3), as the noble Lord, Lord Wedderburn, pointed out. That is where I think it is more readily understood. However, I recognise that I have been rather quixotically chivalrous in the sense of Don Quixote—if I can invoke such a terrible person. This has been a useful debate because we are trying to work out where the dividing line is. It is important that we get it right and that everyone understands it. I shall carefully consider what the Minister said. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. [Amendment No. 12 not moved.]