Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Robert Marshall-Andrews (Labour) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 31 January 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Racial and Religious Hatred Bill 2005-06.


Racial and Religious Hatred Bill

Before the hon. Gentleman leaves the question of recklessness, will he consider this point? Recklessness is in truth the curse of this legislation and if it were removed most Members would be able to accept the measure. The problem is not that the legislation is unclear, but that it is too blisteringly clear, in that the examples that have been given recently—the cartoons of the Prophet—would undoubtedly be caught under the recklessness provisions. It could not possibly be argued that those who produced them were not reckless as to the fact that some people were likely to have religious hatred stirred within them. Does not that underline the fact that whereas we have always inhibited our freedom of speech to deal with race and racial matters, for 300 years we have turned our face against protecting faith by legislation because we cannot protect faith without protecting bigotry?


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
442 c215 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Devolved matters Incitement Freedom of expression Racially aggravated offences Race relations Performing arts Scotland Religion Religious hatred Religious freedom Religiously aggravated offences
Legislation
Racial and Religious Hatred Bill (HL) 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk