That is true. However, if we were to be cowed by everyone who took offence at the use of these symbols, the red cross might never have been established as it was, with the immense benefits to all concerned, and we would have ended up with symbols from every nation or state without the universality that I recommend to the House so strongly, and which is increasingly significant in a world that is global in character in respect of conflict, tension, terrorism, humanitarian aid and many other things. That was recognised by the Liberal spokesman in the House of Lords, who described the increasingly international nature of these matters as a reason for the adoption of the red crystal. I take the opposite view that the increasingly international nature of the things I described reaffirms the case for a single symbol. That might be the crescent, as my hon. Friend suggests, or more properly and logically, it might be the cross.
Geneva Conventions and United Nations Personnel (Protocols) Bill [Lords]
Proceeding contribution from
John Hayes
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Wednesday, 1 April 2009.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Geneva Conventions and United Nations Personnel (Protocols) Bill [Lords].
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
490 c969-70 Session
2008-09Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 10:42:22 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_545765
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_545765
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_545765