We covered the ground introduced through the amendment thoroughly in the previous debate. Those arguments hold good for this amendment, as they did for the earlier one. I do not accept that secularism, as opposed to theistic beliefs, has second-class status in terms of this piece of legislation. We see them very much on an equal footing. I argued that case earlier and was supported very ably, as ever, by the noble Lord, Lord Phillips. In some respects, the Bill is groundbreaking and helps to create the level playing field.
On a personal level, I obviously have some sympathy with what the noble Baroness has to say. Clearly we do not want any form of discrimination in the way in which beliefs or non-beliefs are treated, but we have to ensure that we properly protect the charitable legal structure from applications by the frivolous and the bizarre. I am sure that she fully supports that; she made reference to it. The way in which we have organised and framed the legislation fully covers what she is arguing for.
Charities Bill [HL]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Bassam of Brighton
(Labour)
in the House of Lords on Tuesday, 28 June 2005.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Charities Bill [HL].
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
673 c149-50 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-06-10 14:35:58 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_260429
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_260429
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_260429