Proceeding contribution from Evan Harris (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 25 October 2006. It occurred during Debate on bill on Charities Bill (HL).
Charities Bill [Lords]
Does the hon. Gentleman accept that there is a further test—that the purposes"““may reasonably be regarded as analogous””?" Why should humanism be treated like that just in this Bill, when Buddhism is not, simply because it is a religious belief? There is nothing innate about Buddhism that means that it should not have to go through the hoops of the extra test for non-religious beliefs. The hon. Gentleman thinks that the extra test for non-religious beliefs is straightforward, but practice has shown that it might not be.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 450 c1562
- Session
- 2005-06
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Disability Appeals Charities Audit Company law Companies Charity Commission Charitable donations Health Finance Land Gun sports Human rights Fundraising Private education Property transfer Property Schools Religion Regulation Sports Trusts Wills Humanism Chess
- Legislation
- Charities Bill (HL) 2005-06
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 14:19:37 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_354972
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_354972
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_354972