Previous Section | Index | Home Page |
Mr. Tyrie: Does my hon. Friend accept that if it is clearly indicated that a response is voluntary, the value of the information collected will be greatly diminished?
Mr. Ottaway: I suspect that that is right, but my hon. Friend knows as well as I do that an opinion poll based on, I think, 1,050 people is fairly accurate. If, say, 10 million out of a population of 50 million fill in the answer, it will be a fair guide to what is happening in society as a whole.
Mr. Michael Jabez Foster (Hastings and Rye): Is not the truth of the matter that most followers of faiths are proud of their faith, and are therefore more likely to respond to the question than not? Those who do not will be those with no particular interest.
Mr. Ottaway: I think that that is right, but I repeat that it is a matter of choice as to whether an individual answers the question. It is impossible for us to try to second-guess here tonight exactly how these data will work out, but I repeat what I said at the outset, which is that that is not a reason for not trying. That is why we support the measure.
Mr. Gray: My hon. Friend is very generous in giving way a second time, and I am grateful to him. Does he not agree that the fact that the individual may or may not be proud of his particular religion is not at all a good reason for the state to collect statistics about how many people are in that religion? It is of absolutely no relevance. One might as well say, "I'm proud of my very active sex life" and therefore put that in the census--[Hon. Members: "Oh!"]--but I am not.
Mr. Ottaway: The House might be interested in my hon. Friend's sex life, but a discussion of that could fall foul of what you might have to say, Mr. Deputy Speaker. My hon. Friend is right: pride is irrelevant, but people who fill in the box do so out of personal choice, whatever the reasons may be. That is a principle to which the Conservative party very much subscribes.
My noble Friend Lord Weatherill moved an amendment to his Bill in the other place to remove the liability point. We agree with his sentiment that the arguments about a voluntary question should be taken seriously. Religion and religious belief are private matters. So are political beliefs, which is why we have secret ballots. Ballot forms are completed in confidence and according to personal choice.
In our judgment, it is essential that no one should be liable to a penalty for refusing or declining to answer the question. If the Bill did not make that exemption, it would not have the support of the Conservative party. The draft census forms states that it is compulsory to complete the census and that failure to do so attracts a fine. It adds that the liability does not apply to question 10, on religion, which covers the point made by my hon. Friend the Member for Chichester.
We welcome the removal of the fine, but consider that a note to that effect should be printed next to the question on religion in the census form. That would make it absolutely clear that the question is voluntary and that failure to answer it carries no penalty. We will table an amendment to that effect in Committee. If the Census Act 1920 has to be amended to address the point, that will be at the heart of the amendment. Some people do not read the small print on the front of the census form, and the voluntary nature of the question should be made plain for all to see.
Mr. Hogg: May I encourage my hon. Friend to go down the road that he is outlining? He will know that the document to which he has referred is only a draft, and that it is authorised by statutory instrument. Therefore, should not what appears by statutory instrument be set out on the face of the Bill? Only by that means can the House get the reassurance that it seeks.
Mr. Ottaway: My right hon. and learned Friend makes a good point which I should like to take time to consider.
My hon. Friend the Member for North Wiltshire (Mr. Gray) referred to the wording of the question, which appears in full in paragraph 10 of the explanatory notes. It makes it clear that the word "Christian" includes
Mr. Fabricant: My hon. Friend said that we know what the question on religion will be because it is set out in the explanatory notes. I remind him that such notes do not form part of the Bill and have not been endorsed by Parliament. If the House gives the Bill a Second Reading tonight, there is no guarantee that the words that appear in the notes will appear in the census.
Mr. Ottaway: My hon. Friend is absolutely right, which gives the Government a good opportunity to reflect on the point that I have just made.
After this census, the Government will arguably have a fairly accurate picture of the religious breakdown of the communities of England and Wales. In October 1999,
the other place considered the possibility of legislation against religious discrimination. There is a slight whiff in all this that some law might follow on religious discrimination. Summing up for the Government in that debate, Lord Bassam said that he was waiting for the results of research commissioned by the university of Derby before making any further decisions. I should be grateful if, some nine months later, the Minister could enlighten us as to whether the matter has progressed at all, whether the research is available and whether the Government have any preliminary thoughts on the matter.This is a Bill for England and Wales. It seems right and proper to us that such a sensitive matter, which affects only the people of England and Wales, should be decided only by Members of Parliament representing seats in England and Wales. The 2001 census in Scotland will be the first for which the Scottish Parliament has had a legislative responsibility. Experience shows that religious attitudes north of the border can vary from those south of the border. This is a thoroughly appropriate matter for this Parliament to decide in England and Wales, and for the Scottish Parliament to decide in Scotland. Just as I do not for one minute seek to interfere in the Scottish process, I trust that Members of Parliament representing Scottish seats will not seek to interfere in this Bill.
This is a small but important measure and it has the Conservative party's support.
Mr. Michael Fabricant (Lichfield): I will be brief. My hon. Friend the Member for Chichester (Mr. Tyrie) has already referred to the echoes that the Bill will have in the memories of some older people in the United Kingdom. In 1934, the German Government introduced legislation to include a clause in their census information asking for the religion of their subjects. My hon. Friend is right to say that the position in the United Kingdom is, thank God, nothing like that which existed in Germany then and, please God, it never will be.
Having listened to the debate, I can see no real reason for this information to be requested. The hon. Member for Slough (Fiona Mactaggart) said that it would give us a better understanding of the different needs of religious communities. I do not agree with her.
Fiona Mactaggart: Will the hon. Gentleman give way?
Mr. Fabricant: In a moment. I agree that it is important to understand the needs of Hindus, Muslims--whether they be Shi'ite or Sunni--and orthodox, reform or liberal Jews. However, I do not understand--and perhaps the hon. Lady will elucidate this for me--how information from the census will help us to understand better the working of individual religions in this country and, indeed, the rest of the world.
Fiona Mactaggart: It will not help us to understand different religions. It will inform us where observers of various religions live so that we can ensure that public services in those areas fit their needs.
Mr. Fabricant: I thank the hon. Lady for her answer, but I still do not follow her logic. The hon. Member for
Rotherham (Mr. MacShane), who has now left the Chamber--which is oh so typical of the hon. Gentleman--[Interruption.] Oh, he is there; he has moved. The hon. Gentleman said that it would help us better to provide food. I think that he was alluding to halal and kosher food. Again, I do not see his point, because whether halal or kosher food is available is determined not by the religion one was brought up in or adheres to, but what one chooses to buy in a shop. There are halal shops and kosher shops because Jewish people and Muslim people--[Interruption.] Ministers may laugh and mock, but they know nothing about the Jewish or Muslim religions. If the hon. Member for Manchester, Withington (Mr. Bradley) wants to intervene, I would be happy for him to do so. The point is that the shops exist simply because there is a demand for them. Kosher shops have existed for hundreds of years, and halal shops for more than 80 or 90 years. They did not come into existence because of the Bill.
Next Section
| Index | Home Page |