The Secretary of State has just demolished her own argument. She says that modern treatment is available for people with personality disorders. She has quoted cases. The case of Reid v. the Secretary of State, in 1999, made it perfectly clear that anger management alone could constitute treatment that would justify the imposition of a section. Why can she not accept that, if the law is being misinterpreted and people are not being detained where they should be, that is one thing, but to say that the law is wrong on those grounds is a completely different argument?
Mental Health Bill [Lords]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Lansley
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 16 April 2007.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Mental Health Bill [HL].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
459 c59 Session
2006-07Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-15 12:22:52 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_389558
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_389558
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_389558