DCH 346 Memorandum from The British Humanist
Association
Andrew Kennon
Clerk to the Joint Committee on the
Draft Charities Bill
Scrutiny Unit
Room GlO
7 Millbank
London
SW1P 3JA
July2004
Dear Mr Kennon,
I have been following
the evidence given to the Joint Committee on the Draft Charities
Bill on the Committee website with considerable interest, and
am concerned at what seems to be a misunderstanding by Alan Milburn
of what the British Humanist Association proposed.
In Q789, for example,
Mr Milburn stated that "on that point, we have had put to
us, unsurprisingly, by the British Humanist Association that the
definition as described here is I think, to use one of your earlier
phrases, not terribly modern and that a better word might be "belief'
rather than "religion". Then, in 0931, Mr Milburn said
that the Humanists "argue to us that actually there is an
argument to suggest that the word "religion" should
disappear and the word "belief' be instated instead.
We have not proposed that
"religion" be replaced by "belief', and can see
valid arguments against such a suggestion. What we have proposed,
on the basis of the Human Rights Act, is the use of the phrase
"religion or belief' which is used in the European Convention
on Human Rights, and is now also becoming established elsewhere
in the law.
I would be grateful if
you could draw this matter to the attention of Mr Milburn and
also to other members of the Committee who may share the misunderstanding.
We feel this is an important
difference, and would be concerned if decisions about the relevant
charitable head were based on a misunderstanding of this kind.
I might add that the broader definition of religion suggested
in the session on 14th
July may meet the
concerns of certain religious groups, but does not address the
issue of discrimination against Humanism, which would be unlawful
under the Human Rights Act.
Thank you for bringing
this matter to Mr Milburn's and the Committee's attention. Your~
sincerely,
Hanne Stinson
Executive Director
|
