Again, I am in disagreement with the hon. Gentleman, who, surprisingly, I often agree with about many things. The amendment does not change in any way the definition of election expenditure. It leaves it as it is set out in the rest of the Bill. As I have said, that definition leaves unchanged the situation for people hosting hustings meetings. What I am doing makes not one iota of difference—not one jot of change—to the Church of the England. It will still be able to host meetings in churches and it would still be in difficulties if it decided not to invite particular candidates. That is quite right, because at the heart of democracy is the notion that candidates should be treated equally.
Transparency of Lobbying, Non-Party Campaigning and Trade Union Administration Bill
Proceeding contribution from
Jacob Rees-Mogg
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Tuesday, 10 September 2013.
It occurred during Debate on bills
and
Committee of the Whole House (HC) on Transparency of Lobbying, Non-Party Campaigning and Trade Union Administration Bill.
Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
567 c912 
Session
2013-14
Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamber
Subjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2013-12-20 04:18:44 +0000
URI
http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2013-09-10/13091038001836
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2013-09-10/13091038001836
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://hansard.intranet.data.parliament.uk/Commons/2013-09-10/13091038001836