Racial and Religious Hatred Bill

The question of recklessness is, in truth, the most important part of this debate. It is also one reason why our discussion of proposed new section 29K and the ““unless”” clause was interrupted so often. The ““unless”” clause introduces the question of recklessness and with great respect to the Minister, recklessness is not knowing that one’s actions would stir up religious hatred; it is knowing that one’s actions are likely to stir up religious hatred. There is a considerable difference between the two, and on that basis I bring the Minister back to an earlier, helpful intervention. The example was given of the following statement: ““Mohammed’s marriage to a six-year-old was immoral, and a call for the right to marry children is to be condemned as immoral.”” How could such a statement not be caught by the recklessness test, given that the person saying it must perceive that their comments are at least likely to stir up religious hatred?