| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Baroness Buscombe: My Lords, I thank the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Rochester for tabling this important debate. The question has relevance to many events of this and the previous century; I am thinking here of Nazi Germany or Communist Russia. One could even go as far back as the Crusades. The current situation in our world is very serious and also very depressing, as it would sometimes seem that we had been here before and—although I hesitate to say it—that we have learned nothing.
We are all well aware of the destructive nature of Muslim extremists—with deference to the comments of the noble Lord, Lord Ahmed, this evening, I stress the word "extremist"—who are currently using their religion as a force for evil in the Middle East and in western countries. However, we must not become too focused on them alone. We should also be aware that most if not all religions have extreme wings, groups that use their ideology in a way that most find abhorrent. We must conclude that no one religion is blameless and that no one religion has the answer.
We on these Benches would like the Government to support and indeed promote tolerance for all religions, races and ways of life. Indeed, I do not even care for the word tolerance; it tends to connote something with which we must all contend rather than embrace. The Government clearly believe that the best way in which to approach the matter is to create yet more new laws that will target, for example, incitement to religious hatred. We have genuine concerns that such laws, if introduced, could have a totally negative impact on our culture and on our beloved freedoms in this country.
We on these Benches feel that the right path to enlightened religious attitudes and to having a regard for religious differences is to raise awareness from an early age and to educate society into a better understanding of those differences. I wholeheartedly support all that my noble friend Lady Perry and the noble Baroness, Lady Neuberger, said with regard to having such education from a young age. It is all about having a better understanding of our differences. However, that religious teaching must not be conducted in isolation; clearly it is now also crucially important to articulate in our schools and in our communities some of those core freedoms that we enjoy in this country—freedoms that many have fought for, that most of us believe are crucial to our society and that we can no longer take for granted.
There is no doubt that we must be careful when dealing with how best to tackle attitudes to the international situation and how best to promote
20 Dec 2004 : Column 1644
acceptance of religious differences. I come back to the point that I have just made—legislating on this matter is not the right solution. Legislation will almost certainly lead to the unintended consequence of curbing freedom of speech and freedom of expression. We must be careful that our reactions to extremists are not extreme in themselves. We would not want to be so afraid of what others might do or say that we start to chip away at the foundation principles of our great society.
We agree with the sentiment of the argument expressed by the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Rochester. The Government should promote and support religion, and it should be of all faiths. We should not make the mistake of confusing religion with terrorism itself. We in this country are fortunate to have a free and fair society. It is built on such principles as the rule of law and freedom of speech. We must ensure that in order to combat extremists we do not destroy what they are seeking to undermine. What happened this weekend in a theatre in the Midlands with regard to a Sikh play should strengthen our resolve to leave the law well alone. Should we not have allowed "Murder in the Cathedral"?
Besides, we could go on legislating to try to stop people saying all sorts of things that may offend others. Surely the right path is to focus on encouraging people of all faiths to think positively about each others' differences and to respect each others' differences. We should get to know each other, and this must be a two way street for all of us of all faiths. I noticed that a number of noble Lords used the expression "get to know each other". The noble Lord, Lord Roberts, suggested having a United Nations for all faiths. I often think how brilliant it would have been if, instead of having the Dome to mark the millennium, we could have had one ecumenical church representing all faiths to mark it. What a tragic waste that we missed that opportunity.
In saying that, I turn to the right reverend Prelate and say with great respect that the Church of England has a very powerful and proactive part to play without diluting its own religion—it is my religion—and its own beliefs. Two weeks ago I was lucky enough to attend an Advent carol service with the Archbishop of Canterbury. During the service the Archbishop spoke of,
Those simple, powerful words echo those of Martin Luther King who, 40 years ago, said that we must all focus upon learning the practical art of living in harmony. When will we learn? However difficult and however painful, we must all keep trying.
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, I say immediately how grateful I am to the right reverend Prelate the Bishop of Rochester for the debate. A number of noble Lords commented on its shortness, but quantity is not always the final determinant of quality. Length is not always the only thing that counts. We have had a very insightful and, if I may say so, erudite debate.
20 Dec 2004 : Column 1645
Several themes have come out of the debate: love, spoken of by my noble friend Lord Judd; partnership; working together; understanding each other; and getting to know each other better. Those are extremely powerful indicators of what defines us as human beings, but also as the basis for all faiths. It is extremely important that we are having this debate tonight, and noble Lords will know that it is not in my gift or the gift of the Government as to when we have another debate. I am sure that, as a result of the quality of this debate, the usual channels would probably not be forgiven if more space were not found at some stage for such a debate.
We have ranged across some important issues. Noble Lords will know that the Government are committed to generating good relations, understanding and tolerance between people of all faiths and of none, as part of building a cohesive society. We work with faith communities, with media bodies, with the Local Government Association and with governmental and non-governmental agencies to deal with prejudice and hatred. It is only by us all working together that the changes that we so desperately seek can be made.
Understanding the role that faith plays in people's lives is vital to community cohesion and good race relations. Many faith groups reach out to the wider community, providing facilities, undertaking practical projects and harnessing their commitment and drive to improve everyone's life. Therefore, it was right that the noble Lord, Lord Weatherill, gave out the injunction that it is not just words that we will be judged by, it is deeds that are the basis of real understanding. The Government recognise that faith communities have a vital role to play in civil renewal and promoting active citizenship. As part of the commitment to building a tolerant and cohesive society, we actively support interfaith dialogue in the UK, which is achieved through support for a number of interfaith activities. Therefore, I very much understood my noble friend Lord Judd's exhortation for all religious groups to work together in humanitarian endeavours. I am sure that there is the burgeoning of that as an idea, and I agree with him.
One example is the core funding being provided by the Home Office to the Interfaith Network for the UK, the sole national body linking interfaith initiatives and faith representative bodies. Government funding has enabled the Interfaith Network to map patterns of local interfaith activity, resulting in a set of guidelines for local authorities wishing to foster interfaith activity. We are also committed to supporting interfaith activities for young people. Past examples include the Golden Jubilee Young People's Faith Forum and the three model Commonwealth Heads of Government meetings for young people of faith in association with the Royal and Commonwealth Society.
Another important initiative, and one that noble Lords will be interested in, is the Imam-Rabbi dialogue, which I am sure that the noble Baroness, Lady Neuberger, is more than familiar with, facilitated by the Home Office. It brings together orthodox ministers of religion from those two communities to
20 Dec 2004 : Column 1646
talk about commonalities between the two Abrahamic faiths. It also provides an opportunity for religious leaders to demonstrate that, despite differences, it is still possible to engage with and exchange views in the spirit of learning and mutual respect. Although we do not quite have the example given by the noble Baroness, Lady Perry, we have the seeds of that development, which is important.
The Government have worked in partnership with faith communities in the delivery of initiatives such as faith-based celebrations of the millennium, the Golden Jubilee and the Working Together review, published in March 2004, of co-operation between the Government and faith communities. In addition, Ministers regularly visit places of worship and attend faith-based celebrations and will continue to do so.
I say to the noble Baroness, Lady Neuberger, that I understand her vision of interfaith schools, which is not a separation of faiths but bringing each faith together; each faith honoured; and all faiths participating together in a common space. I do not think that idea does violence to the importance of single-faith schools, which are very much part of the scene, and which we have supported. I say to the noble Lord, Lord Kilclooney, that his fear that somehow that will be expunged is not well founded, because we honour those traditions.
As everyone has made declarations, I suppose that I should say that I am probably the embodiment of ecumenical activity, having a Methodist father and a Roman Catholic mother, and being married to the son of an Ulster Protestant. To be full and frank, I should also say that I was a Shabbas goy for many years, so I have most bases covered. Such bringing together is of enormous importance, because it enriches our communities.
As the noble Lords, Lord Ahmed and Lord Dholakia, made clear, the media play an important role in promoting understanding between communities and in building community cohesion—or not, as the case may be. We are working with the Society of Editors and the Media Trust to produce guidance for editors and journalists reporting on issues of faith, race and community cohesion. The guidance for both print and broadcasting media will be available in February 2005. It follows the publication of a toolkit in May 2004 for local authorities on the need to build relationships with the media to promote wider understanding between communities, particularly at neighbourhood level.
The noble Baronesses, Lady Perry and Lady Buscombe, have fears in relation to our new proposals on incitement to religious hatred. However, those concerns are not well founded. We are committed to tackling and eradicating discrimination and inequality wherever they occur. As noble Lords will be aware, we have recently announced a plan to introduce legislation to protect people from religious discrimination in the provision of goods, facilities, services and premises. The measure will close the loophole that currently means that although people are protected against discrimination on the basis of race, nationality or national or ethnic origin, they are not protected against discrimination on grounds of religion except in employment.
20 Dec 2004 : Column 1647
The Government's proposal includes a new offence that will close the loophole that Jews and Sikhs are protected from incited hatred. The courts have ruled that they are covered by the existing offences of incitement to racial hatred, whereas other faith groups are not so protected. The new offences will address that without doing violence to our community or culture, or impinging improperly on other matters.
I am aware that concerns have been expressed that the new offence will restrict free speech, particularly the telling of jokes about religion or religious leaders. I reassure noble Lords that the proposed offence will not criminalise the telling of such jokes. Some would like us to criminalise the telling of bad jokes, which would be a more challenging matter, particularly for some of us in this House. The offence will maintain the necessary high thresholds of incitement to racial hatred. Material must be knowingly threatening, abusive or insulting and either intended or likely to stir up hatred, with all prosecutions requiring the consent of the Attorney-General. The then Home Secretary's statement on 7 December, made with the agreement of my noble and learned friend the Attorney-General, ought to reassure people that free-speech concerns are unfounded.
The right reverend Prelate raised some powerful issues in relation to the wider international dimensions, such as those about Turkey and its EU membership. This is an important moment for us, because the negotiations with Turkey are likely to last a decade. Throughout Turkey, we will need to demonstrate continuing progress on a number of issues, including religious freedoms. The United Kingdom Government will place particular emphasis on effective implementation, because that will make the difference.
Of course we understand that, in Sharia law, there are extreme punishments such as stoning, amputation and execution that are wholly inconsistent with international human rights standards. Those matters need to be addressed. The United Kingdom is concerned about the plight of apostates throughout
20 Dec 2004 : Column 1648
the world, and we take every opportunity to urge states to pursue laws and practices that foster tolerance and mutual respect.
We can all make a contribution in relation to world matters and I assure noble Lords that the Government are committed to playing their part. I want also to reassure the noble Lord, Lord Roberts, that one-fifth of all respondents considered religion to be an important part of their self identity. For Muslims, Hindus, Sikhs and black Christians, religion was ranked second only to family and Jewish respondents ranked religion highest. Therefore, the importance of faith to self-identity is particularly strong. Two-thirds of Sikhs and Hindus viewed religion as important to their identity. That analysis, if nothing else, underscores for us the real importance that faith can play.
Each participant in the debate has made a valuable contribution. I do not neglect my noble friend Lord Ahmed, who spoke so powerfully not only about the beauty of the religion but also the importance of partnership and truth, as indeed did the noble Earl, Lord Mar and Kellie. We can be proud of the debate because it was a good one.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |