I had not intended to take part in this debate, but I wish to speak briefly in support of the noble Lord, Lord Elton, on the symbolic significance of the amendment. The fact that one has not had a flood for a very long time does not mean that one should destroy the floodgates. My fear is that the removal of this provision will be seen as encouraging people to make outrageous statements that are needlessly offensive to a great many people. They will only do it to annoy, because they know it teases.
Therefore, I align myself with those who would like to see more time for consultation on this matter. I find it paradoxical that in one and the same piece of legislation we are asked to approve a measure that will appear to encourage religious hatred while we are also asked to approve a measure that will discourage sexual hatred. I wonder whether we really have to sort ourselves out on this matter. I very much hope that the Government will take time for more reflection and consultation before introducing this into the Bill.
Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Armstrong of Ilminster
(Crossbench)
in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 5 March 2008.
It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL)
and
Debate on bills on Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
699 c1141-2 
Session
2007-08
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2023-12-16 00:36:14 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_451864
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_451864
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_451864