 |
| Home |
| Political News |
| Meet Your Local MP |
| Comment |
| Have Your Say |
| Campaigns |
| Theresa May |
| John Redwood |
| Martin Salter |
| Rob Wilson |
| Richard Benyon |
| Useful Links |
- AAT Courses
- Absolute Health and Safety Solutions Limited
- Business lead generation
- Customer testimonials
- Diamond drilling
- First page seo
- Information Drivers
- Kids in Berkshire
- LIVE answering service
- Mary Flavelle
- NRG Networks
- On this day in history
- Outbound telemarketing services
- Personal business coach
- Positive energy
- Promotional micro sites
- Sales force outsourcing
- Sales training consultancy
- Technical Concrete Cutting Limited
- Windsor Vehicle Leasing
|
Religious Hatred Bill
|
|
Rt Hon John Redwood yesterday asked the Home Office Minister Paul Goggins why the government wanted to curtail civil liberties and freedom of speech through its proposed Racial and Religious Hatred Bill. Later in the debate he told the House that many Wokingham constituents have sent him emails and letters saying that they are worried the Bill will prevent them affirming their faith as Christians or members of other religious organisations.
John was one of the 280 MPs who voted for the Lords amendments which scale back the impact of the government's Bill. He said: " I am delighted that my colleagues and I were able to win both votes. This means the Bill will no longer make criminals out of people who use language deemed to be insulting or reckless. The original government proposals went too far, making law abiding people fearful about anything they might say on a religious topic and possibly criminalising our more irreverent comedians" Extracts from Hansard: Mr. John Redwood (Wokingham) (Con): Can the Minister explain why Labour Ministers are so down on the civil liberties of freedom of speech that they now wish to hound religious groups? Paul Goggins: It is important that we adopt a measured and constructive tone in the debate. That is certainly what I intend to do and I hope that the right hon. Gentleman and hon. Members on both sides of the House will realise by the end of my introductory remarks that the Government are firmly committed to the freedom of expression and that we will fulfil the promise that we made in earlier debates that, if it was possible to find words that would include a commitment to freedom of expression in the Bill, we would do so, and I will come to that in a few moments. Mr. Redwood : My hon. Friend is making an excellent defence of our right to free speech. Is he, like me, receiving a lot of letters and e-mails from law-abiding, mild-mannered Christians in his constituency who are genuinely afraid that the Bill is out to get them and will restrict their right to speak up for their faith and normal worship? The Minister is stirring up a problem where there was not one. Mr. Grieve: Many people are worried, and the Bill's opaque nature is one of the things that worry them most. I will come on to that in a moment, but the fact that the Minister has to say that he will issue guidance highlights the fact that this is catch-all legislation. He is saying, "You need not worry too much about that because the Attorney-General and the prosecutors will ensure that only those cases that need prosecuting are prosecuted." However, that leads to a terrible chilling factor among those who wish to express their opinions, whether it be comedians who do not know the limit to which they can go, or those who wish to preach their own beliefs and at the same time, inevitably, to criticise the beliefs of others. They do not know at what point their actions can translate into the reckless insult of another, at which point they will be prosecuted and condemned. That is the nub of the matter. For further information John Redwood on 07711 486 555 Nikki Page on 0705 011 3286 |
|
Wordtracker |
|
|
