---

Charities Bill [HL]

I do not want a longer list; I have not asked for a longer list. I am asking for a level playing field—I almost said a level praying field. It is a fact that discrimination can be committed by omission; there are hundreds of examples. It is also a fact, if I may just address the point—I am sure the noble Lord, Lord Phillips, will agree—that Mr Justice Vaisey did find an analogy with education in the case of the South Place Ethical Society, as well as the other phrases that he used about moral improvement, which was analogous to the advancement of education. I do not have the judgment with me. If you have a fund or association which is explicitly not analogous to the list, then an extra barrier has been raised against you from a religious fund or association, because religion is expressly there and you are not. You have to rely on something extra, and that is an extra buffer which amounts to a discriminatory test. I almost feel invited to go to the authorities that we discussed in Grand Committee on the earlier Bill, but I will not do so. However, that proposition is the kernel of the case. We will have to look carefully at what the noble Lord, Lord Bassam of Brighton, said to see whether the matter is closed. I have seen copies of the correspondence about Jainism and so on. I understand the point that is being made, but it is being made to the Government, not to my amendment. I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.