The first piece of good news

Posted by Guessedworker on Wednesday, 01 February 2006 01:03.

Tony Blair suffered a humiliating blow to his authority tonight as the Government slumped to a shock double defeat over its plans to combat religious hatred.

And, in further embarrassment for the Prime Minister, it emerged later that he did not vote in the second division - which the Government lost by just one vote.

The results, after a sizeable Labour backbench revolt, were greeted by loud cheers from the Tory benches and cries of “resign!”.

Home Secretary Charles Clarke quickly announced the Government was bowing to the Commons’ will and the Racial and Religious Hatred Bill would go for Royal Assent to become law as it stood.

“The Government accepts the decision of the House this evening. We are
delighted the Bill is going to its Royal Assent and delighted we have a Bill which deals with incitement against religious hatred,” he said, to Tory jeers.

Mr Blair suffered his first ever Commons defeat only two months ago when MPs voted down plans for a 90-day detention period under the Terrorism Bill and opted for 28 days instead.

Peers inflicted a series of defeats on the Racial and Religious Hatred Bill in a bid to safeguard freedom of speech with an amendment restricting the new offence of inciting religious hatred
to threatening words and behaviour rather than a wider definition also covering insults and abuse.

They also required the offence to be intentional and specified that criticism,
insult, abuse and ridicule of religion, belief or religious practice would not be an offence.

Ministers urged the Commons today to reject the Lords’ amendments and back instead a Government compromise. Home Office Minister Paul Goggins insisted only those intending to “stir up hatred” would be caught under the Government’s plans.

But in the first test of strength, MPs voted by 288 to 278, majority 10, to back the Lords. Mr Blair was recorded as voting with the Government line in this division, while 27 Labour backbenchers rebelled and at least two dozen others did not vote.

In the second vote, MPs voted by 283 votes to 282, majority one, to back the Lords.

Tags: Islam & Islamification

Comments:

Posted by john on Wed, 01 Feb 2006 03:46 | #

Would have been better if blair had dropped dead.
The BNP result should be in soon. Determining whether private conversations can be prosecuted.

Posted by onetwothree on Wed, 01 Feb 2006 04:32 | #

Mr Blair suffered his first ever Commons defeat

Is parliament really that compliant, or does the Prime Minister carefully test the waters before every bill?

Posted by JRM on Wed, 01 Feb 2006 06:52 | #

What happens in a tie vote. For example, if the second was 283-283, does the bill pass?

Posted by john on Wed, 01 Feb 2006 08:03 | #

In a tie the speaker casts the deciding vote, in the governments favor.

Posted by Guessedworker on Wed, 01 Feb 2006 08:54 | #

Now the question is how the Act will be applied. “Threatening words or behaviour” is still very problematic. If one is guided by history and by knowledge of modern-day communal conflict all around the edges of the Islamic world - the “Islam has bloody borders” scenario - it is reasonable to conclude that Islamic believers cannot, over time, dwell in peace in the secular/Christian West. From such a conclusion flows a single corrective to the growing traumas in Europe: the borders of Islam must be pushed back from and out of European Man’s homeland.

But, of course, such a characterisation of Islam - though it would clearly have been dangerous to make under the government’s original, amendement-free legislation with its inclusion of “insult” - might still be picked up by a British passport-holding Moslem with the will to test the Act. Discussion of repatration couched in the above terms may well be a “threat” to freedom of worship “likely to be heard or seen by any person in whom it is likely to stir up racial or religious hatred.” Who can say that some unbalanced white jackass won’t conclude from even the most detached and academic language that a campaign of mosque-burning is in order?

The legislation which will go forward for Royal Assent still makes any speaker or writer addressing the nature of Islam in the West responsible for the content of other men’s minds. The Crown must prove that the speaker/writer had intent to stir up racial or religious hatred, and that may not be easy. But, as we have seen in the Griffin prosecution, the thinnest of excuses will be sufficient for some to try their luck with the Act.

Posted by Johan Van Vlaams on Wed, 01 Feb 2006 09:09 | #

A wider definition? This would lead to Belgian situations. To give an example. I live close to the city of Malines (in Dutch Mechelen - 80.000 inhabitants) but with much Moroccans. In that province nest there have been HUNDREDS of charges for infringements against the Belgian non-discrimintion law. Do you understand the impact on society of such a charging culture? And so the Moroccans try to dominate public life. BTW, that charge culture is cultivated in Malines by the Moroccan youth house Rzoezi (the “wasp” in Berber, very appropriate), see http://www.rzoezie.be/home/index.htm And with 1,3 million euro subventions from the European Union, the Antwerp provincial authority, the city of Malines…each year again.