Proceeding contribution from Evan Harris (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Commons on Friday, 27 March 2009. It occurred during Debate on bill on Royal Marriages and Succession to the Crown (Prevention of Discrimination) Bill.
Royal Marriages and Succession to the Crown (Prevention of Discrimination) Bill
My hon. Friend did indeed propose that Bill in 1991, and part of it was implemented voluntarily. I do not seek to speak for the royal family, but I cannot see that the change would cause them a problem. They cannot opt to make the changes themselves, because it requires legislation. It is specifically a matter for Parliament. It need not be a matter for the Executive if they merely get behind this Bill as a vehicle to achieve it. If it were to require Executive action, I am sure that Parliament would want to provide as much as help as possible, because I think that there is a majority in favour of so doing. It is appropriate to recognise the significant contributions to this debate that were made before I had the good fortune to come high up in the private Members' Bill ballot. For example, I recognise the work of the hon. Member for Gainsborough (Mr. Leigh), who on 8 March 2005 introduced the Royal Marriages (Freedom of Religion) Bill. We see eye to eye on very few issues—perhaps this one and fox hunting are the exceptions—but I have great respect for the consistent position that he has taken on this issue, and for the fact that, although he may not be an enthusiast for everything in the Bill, he was willing to recognise its importance and the fact that it was partly inspired by the action he had taken and to put his name to it as a sponsor. I am grateful to him for being in his place today and for his support as a senior parliamentarian and Catholic. The right hon. Member for Suffolk, Coastal (Mr. Gummer), in February 2007, introduced the succinctly titled Catholics (Prevention of Discrimination) Bill as a ten-minute Bill. The hon. Member for Worthing, West (Peter Bottomley) mentioned the next Conservative Government, but the right hon. Gentleman's Bill showed that even the Conservative party—I do not mean this in a party political way, but one has to remember what the adjective "conservative" can mean—has no problem with this proposal. I believe that we will hear confirmation of that from its Front-Bench spokesman. Indeed, many of the calls for some of the Bill's provisions have come from Conservative Back Benchers, and not necessarily those of a radical persuasion.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 490 c557-8
- Session
- 2008-09
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Commonwealth Church of England Catholicism Church and state Women Equality Discrimination Marriage Monarchy Religion Succession Religious freedom Royal family
- Legislation
- Royal Marriages and Succession to the Crown (Prevention of Discrimination) Bill 2008-09
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-21 10:41:43 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_544134
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_544134
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_544134