Proceeding contribution from Richard Bacon (Conservative) in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 6 May 2008. It occurred during Debate on bill on Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill.
Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill
They have done so because it is part of their secularisation agenda. Some people think that, for every law put on the statute book, one—or even 10—should be removed. That would get the statute book into some sort of bounds. That argument certainly works for tax legislation, but I fear that this law is part of a wider agenda of secularisation. Although the hon. Member for Cambridge made the argument that this is about affirmation of identity in order to dispute it and disagree with it, in the end that is exactly what this proposed law is about. It is also exactly why we should disagree with the Lords amendment.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 475 c665
- Session
- 2007-08
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Disclosure of information Data protection Criminal proceedings Crime Crimes against the person Blasphemy Legal profession Incitement Legal opinion Freedom of expression Police Pay Powers Prisons Magistrates' courts Sentencing Training Religion Sexuality HM Prison Service Community orders Suspended sentences Homophobia
- Legislation
- Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill 2006-07 to 2007-08
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2026-05-13 12:00:32 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_469732
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_469732
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_469732