No, I will not.
The other place amended clause 3 so that it reads:"““encouraging and supporting the development of a society””"
but those weasel words do not resolve the problem. The Bill still tells this band of commissioners that changing our society is their responsibility. That is dangerous and it is wrong. Legislation should be about limiting the powers of state bodies. I believe that, and that is why I am on the Conservative Benches. We need smaller, less intrusive government. The clause is about giving the commission unprecedented powers over society, and my theory is that in time the commissioners will take even more powers for themselves, just as the HFEA has done and is still doing. People who already fear the nanny state will find this abhorrent. Good souls such as Littlejohn, Hitchens and other celebrity defenders of our way of life must stop the country sleepwalking into this one.
How can the commissioners reconcile the competing and conflicting interests of different groups?
Equality Bill [Lords]
Proceeding contribution from
Bob Spink
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 21 November 2005.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Equality Bill (HL).
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
439 c1291 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-01-26 18:55:40 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_277565
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_277565
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_277565