Well, at the risk of a sea of flames, I have to say I'm not so ecstatic.
I think it is a cause for concern that an 800-year old law, which has - overall - worked well for that period, and served us well, is overturned on the basis of one emotive case and a one-woman pressure group.
I can see this change being very useful to a government who wants to put away trouble-makers EG whistle-blowers whom it is having trouble getting the courts to convict; loners/wierdos the public is convinced is guilty EG Colin Stagg.
A better solution, IMHO, would be to have changed the laws on perjury, to make the penalties much more flexible, and to be in line with the offence/accusation the perjury was made over. IE in this case, the penalty upon conviction of perjury would have been life.