Racial and Religious Hatred Bill
(Reasoned amendment on second reading)
21 Jun 2005
Division 14

The Government’s proposed legislation on Incitement to Relgious Hatred faced a number of challenges by MPs and peers before it was adopted into law.

One such challenge came to the second reading of the Bill in the House (Bills are presented to the House three times before moving on to the House of Lords in the next stage of the legislative cycle) when MPs voted on whether the Bill should be read and voted on a second time.

The motion voted on stated that:

‘This House declines to give a Second Reading to the Racial and Religious Hatred Bill because, while the Bill recognises the problems caused by extremists seeking to stir up hatred against others on the grounds of their ethnic identity, by creating a new offence of inciting religious hatred, it will disproportionately curtail freedom of expression, worsen community relations as different religious and belief groups call for the prosecution of their opponents, create uncertainty as to what words or behaviour are lawful and lead to the selective application of the law in a manner likely to bring it into disrepute.’

Those that voted ‘aye’, that is in favour of the motion, were voting against the Bill’s becoming law by refusing it a second reading explaining their reasons for doing so in the reasoned amendment.

Racial and Religious Hatred Bill — Second Reading
21 Jun 2005
Division 15

After rejecting the reasoned amendment on the second reading of the Bill on Incitement to Religious Hatred, MPs went on to vote on the second reading of the Bill as it stood.

Those that voted against the reading of the bill were voting against the bill in principle.

Racial and Religious Hatred Bill — Third Reading
11 Jul 2005
Division 35

The bill was read for the third time in the House and following a majority vote in favour proceeded to the House of Lords. It was returned to the Commons with considerable revisions and was voted on again in the House in January 2006, see below.

Those that voted ‘no’ in this division were voting against the passage of the Bill.

Racial and Religious Hatred bill - Lords' amendment

31 January 2006
Division 148

The bill was returned to the House of Commons with MPs asked to vote on whether the Lords’ ‘amendment 4’ should be applied in place of the original version submitted by the Government and voted on in July 2005 (see above).

The original version read:

"to all... words, behaviour or material[s]... that are likely to be heard or seen by any person in whom... they are likely to stir up racial or religious hatred."

In place of this the Lords substituted:

‘A person who uses threatening words or behaviour, or displays any written material which is threatening, is guilty of an offence if he intends... to stir up religious hatred.’

The motion voted on stated:

‘That this House disagrees with the Lords in the said amendment’

Those that voted ‘no’ were voting in favour of the Lords’ amendment and therefore in favour of the Lords’ substitution to the original wording of the Bill.