Eternal Path International Forum - View Single Post

Miguel · 03-21-2007

After the 11 month silence, the Government published both the
Regulations and their response to the consultation on the 7th March. Within 7 days they had expedited proceedings so that the SORs went through the House of Lords Merits Committee, the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments and the House of Commons Delegated Legislation Committee. Within 14 days of publication, the SORs will have gone through both Houses and, unless opposed in the Lords, will become law.

This procedure is undemocratic and makes a mockery of the Government’s
supposed commitment to listening to the views of the electorate (an
unprecedented number of whom submitted to the consultation on the SORs:
there was an “exceptionally strong response”[30] on the issue of
religious freedom in favour of broader exemptions).

· Repeated requests were made by MPs in the Delegated
Legislation Committee to postpone the debate. The requests were refused by the Labour MP chairing the debate. That chairperson declared that the only way possible to delay the debate would be for a dilatory motion to be passed. When an MP duly sought to bring such a motion the chairperson refused to accept it: it was not even allowed to go to a vote.

Not one Lib Dem or Labour MP (aside from their respective frontbench
spokespeople) had the chance to speak[31] about the Regulations, and
the only Conservative MP (other than their spokesperson) who was called by
the chair only had 2 minutes before the vote was called. Ironically, just
one week earlier Ruth Kelly stated about the SORs that “Good Government is
not about ducking difficult questions – it is about robust debate”.[32]

· In the time between their publication on the 7th March and
the Delegated Legislation Committee meeting on the 15th March, the SORs had
been withdrawn 3 times because of drafting defects. Over 20 changes were
made to the Regulations within this time and many of those changes affected the scope and substantive impact of the Regulations.

· In addition, in their consultation paper on the SORs the
Government declared that “We look forward to hearing your views on our
proposals, so that we can take these into account”[33] but it appears
that the responses were ignored in relation to the key issues. Although “a
majority of both individuals and organisations sought a widening to the
[proposed] exemptions”[34] the Government rejected this.

· The SORs are now due to be laid in the House of Commons on
Monday 19th March. On Friday 16th March there was a rumour that there may also be a vote on the floor of the House of Commons on Monday 19th March and not on Wednesday as would be usual practice in this situation. This news has come late and at a time when MPs may not have had time to realise what is happening and that there might be a crucial vote.

· We request MPs to be present at the vote on the SORs and to
vote against them.

Andrea Minichiello Williams

LCF Public Policy Officer

0771 2591164

http://www.lawcf.org

http://www.christianconcernforournation.co.uk

If you do not want to receive anymore emails from Andrea Minichiello
Williams please click on reply and put UNSUBSCRIBE in the subject field

If you need to contact Andrea please contact her on
andrea@williamsa.force9.co.uk

Websites: http://www.christianconcernforournation.co.uk and
http://www.lawcf.org

Please consider financially supporting the work we do by making a
donation:
http://www.christianconcernforournat...k/donation.php

LCF registered charity number 1017695

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] Government SOR consultation paper, pg 7

[2] Government response to SOR consultation paper, page 6

[3] David Hanson MP (The Minister of State, Northern Ireland Office)
Second
Delegated Legislation Committee ‘Equality Act (Sexual Orientation)
Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2006 [Column 36]

[4] Ibid. Column 36

[5] See the Joint Committee on Human Rights (Legislative Scrutiny:
Sexual
Orientation Regulations) HL Paper 58, HC 350 at paras 44 and 52

[6] Bernard Jenkin MP, Twelfth Delegated Legislation Committee, Draft
Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2007, 15th March 2007
[Column
4]

[7] Ibid. Edward Leigh MP [Column 6]

[8] Harriet Harman MP (New Statesman, 29th January 2007)

[9] Government SOR consultation paper, para 2.3

[10] Government SOR consultation paper, para 2.5

[11] For example, Clive Betts MP, Second Delegated Legislation
Committee
‘Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2006
[Column 7]

[12] Ibid. Angela Eagle MP [Column 9]

[13] Ibid. Jeremy Corbyn MP [Column 22]

[14] 14th Report of the session 2006-07

[15] Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments 24th January 2007
(published
30th January 2007) (HL Paper 37, HC 82-vi)

[16] The Government response to the SOR consultation, page 10

[17] Ibid. Page 7

[18] This appears to be an inadvertent gap

[19] This again appears to be an inadvertent legal consequence of the
way
the SORs are drafted

[20] Letter from Meg Munn MP to the Lawyers’ Christian Fellowship (17th
November 2006).

[21]
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...2/nxmas112.xml

[22] Meg Munn MP, Second Delegated Legislation Committee ‘Equality Act
(Sexual Orientation) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2006 [Column 16]

[23] Joint Committee on Human Rights (Legislative Scrutiny: Sexual
Orientation Regulations) HL Paper 58, HC 350, para 63 – 67

[24] Regulation 7(1)(c)(iv)

[25] Jeremiah v MoD [1979] 3 All ER 833

[26]
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1770

[27] Joint Committee on Human Rights (Legislative Scrutiny: Sexual
Orientation Regulations) HL Paper 58, HC 350, para 65

[28] Publication of the Government SOR consultation paper

[29] The Prime Minister’s statement about catholic adoption agencies

[30] Government response to the SOR consultation, page 9

[31] Notwithstanding interventions and points of order

[32] Ruth Kelly MP, 7th March 2007 (Government response to the SOR
consultation, page 6)

[33] Government SOR consultation, page 7

[34] Government response to the SOR consultation, page 15

03-21-2007	#20 (permalink)
Miguel Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Location: Manchester, UK Posts: 57	After the 11 month silence, the Government published both the Regulations and their response to the consultation on the 7th March. Within 7 days they had expedited proceedings so that the SORs went through the House of Lords Merits Committee, the Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments and the House of Commons Delegated Legislation Committee. Within 14 days of publication, the SORs will have gone through both Houses and, unless opposed in the Lords, will become law. This procedure is undemocratic and makes a mockery of the Government’s supposed commitment to listening to the views of the electorate (an unprecedented number of whom submitted to the consultation on the SORs: there was an “exceptionally strong response”[30] on the issue of religious freedom in favour of broader exemptions). · Repeated requests were made by MPs in the Delegated Legislation Committee to postpone the debate. The requests were refused by the Labour MP chairing the debate. That chairperson declared that the only way possible to delay the debate would be for a dilatory motion to be passed. When an MP duly sought to bring such a motion the chairperson refused to accept it: it was not even allowed to go to a vote. Not one Lib Dem or Labour MP (aside from their respective frontbench spokespeople) had the chance to speak[31] about the Regulations, and the only Conservative MP (other than their spokesperson) who was called by the chair only had 2 minutes before the vote was called. Ironically, just one week earlier Ruth Kelly stated about the SORs that “Good Government is not about ducking difficult questions – it is about robust debate”.[32] · In the time between their publication on the 7th March and the Delegated Legislation Committee meeting on the 15th March, the SORs had been withdrawn 3 times because of drafting defects. Over 20 changes were made to the Regulations within this time and many of those changes affected the scope and substantive impact of the Regulations. · In addition, in their consultation paper on the SORs the Government declared that “We look forward to hearing your views on our proposals, so that we can take these into account”[33] but it appears that the responses were ignored in relation to the key issues. Although “a majority of both individuals and organisations sought a widening to the [proposed] exemptions”[34] the Government rejected this. · The SORs are now due to be laid in the House of Commons on Monday 19th March. On Friday 16th March there was a rumour that there may also be a vote on the floor of the House of Commons on Monday 19th March and not on Wednesday as would be usual practice in this situation. This news has come late and at a time when MPs may not have had time to realise what is happening and that there might be a crucial vote. · We request MPs to be present at the vote on the SORs and to vote against them. Andrea Minichiello Williams LCF Public Policy Officer 0771 2591164 http://www.lawcf.org http://www.christianconcernforournation.co.uk If you do not want to receive anymore emails from Andrea Minichiello Williams please click on reply and put UNSUBSCRIBE in the subject field If you need to contact Andrea please contact her on andrea@williamsa.force9.co.uk Websites: http://www.christianconcernforournation.co.uk and http://www.lawcf.org Please consider financially supporting the work we do by making a donation: http://www.christianconcernforournat...k/donation.php LCF registered charity number 1017695 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [1] Government SOR consultation paper, pg 7 [2] Government response to SOR consultation paper, page 6 [3] David Hanson MP (The Minister of State, Northern Ireland Office) Second Delegated Legislation Committee ‘Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2006 [Column 36] [4] Ibid. Column 36 [5] See the Joint Committee on Human Rights (Legislative Scrutiny: Sexual Orientation Regulations) HL Paper 58, HC 350 at paras 44 and 52 [6] Bernard Jenkin MP, Twelfth Delegated Legislation Committee, Draft Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations 2007, 15th March 2007 [Column 4] [7] Ibid. Edward Leigh MP [Column 6] [8] Harriet Harman MP (New Statesman, 29th January 2007) [9] Government SOR consultation paper, para 2.3 [10] Government SOR consultation paper, para 2.5 [11] For example, Clive Betts MP, Second Delegated Legislation Committee ‘Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2006 [Column 7] [12] Ibid. Angela Eagle MP [Column 9] [13] Ibid. Jeremy Corbyn MP [Column 22] [14] 14th Report of the session 2006-07 [15] Joint Committee on Statutory Instruments 24th January 2007 (published 30th January 2007) (HL Paper 37, HC 82-vi) [16] The Government response to the SOR consultation, page 10 [17] Ibid. Page 7 [18] This appears to be an inadvertent gap [19] This again appears to be an inadvertent legal consequence of the way the SORs are drafted [20] Letter from Meg Munn MP to the Lawyers’ Christian Fellowship (17th November 2006). [21] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...2/nxmas112.xml [22] Meg Munn MP, Second Delegated Legislation Committee ‘Equality Act (Sexual Orientation) Regulations (Northern Ireland) 2006 [Column 16] [23] Joint Committee on Human Rights (Legislative Scrutiny: Sexual Orientation Regulations) HL Paper 58, HC 350, para 63 – 67 [24] Regulation 7(1)(c)(iv) [25] Jeremiah v MoD [1979] 3 All ER 833 [26] http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/liv...n_page_id=1770 [27] Joint Committee on Human Rights (Legislative Scrutiny: Sexual Orientation Regulations) HL Paper 58, HC 350, para 65 [28] Publication of the Government SOR consultation paper [29] The Prime Minister’s statement about catholic adoption agencies [30] Government response to the SOR consultation, page 9 [31] Notwithstanding interventions and points of order [32] Ruth Kelly MP, 7th March 2007 (Government response to the SOR consultation, page 6) [33] Government SOR consultation, page 7 [34] Government response to the SOR consultation, page 15 __________________ . Miguel Hayworth - Taking Christ to the Streets in the UK .