This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/uk_politics/7178439.stm

The article has changed 8 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 4 Version 5
Blasphemy law 'may be abolished' Blasphemy law 'may be abolished'
(about 8 hours later)
The government has signalled that it will bring forward plans to repeal the law of blasphemy, in an effort to head off a rebellion by Labour MPs. The government has "every sympathy" for the case for abolishing blasphemy laws, Justice Minister Maria Eagle has said.
Ministers are hoping to persuade backbenchers against backing a motion calling for the immediate abolition of the ancient legislation. Speaking at the end of a debate on proposals to scrap the laws, she told MPs they wanted to first consult the Church of England.
They say they want to talk to the Church of England before scrapping the offence of blasphemous libel. Labour MPs were told to vote against Lib Dem MP Evan Harris's proposals but ministers feared a backbench revolt.
But Labour MPs have been told the government is sympathetic in principle. Dr Harris, who called the law "ancient, discriminatory and illiberal", withdrew his Criminal Justice Bill amendment.
'Bouncing' Ms Eagle said the consultation with the Church of England would be ""short and sharp" .
It is thought there will be an announcement to this effect in the Commons when the issue is debated as part of the Criminal Justice Bill. Subject to those discussions, the government intended to bring forward amendments to the Criminal Justice Bill to abolish the offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel, she said.
Lib Dem MP Evan Harris wants an amendment to be added which would repeal the blasphemy laws. During the debate, Dr Harris described the laws as "ancient, discriminatory, unnecessary, illiberal and non-human rights compliant". He said the last conviction under the law was 1979 and the last successful public prosecution was in 1922.
"So it's not needed any more, old-fashioned, ancient and out of time," he said. "The Almighty does not really need the protection of these ridiculous laws and that's why large numbers of people of a religious perspective share the view that these offences need to be abolished," he said.
There would have been a rebellion and I think the government would have faced a defeat Keith VazLabour MPThere would have been a rebellion and I think the government would have faced a defeat Keith VazLabour MP
Labour MPs will be whipped to oppose the amendment - but there had been concerns that there would be a significant backbench revolt. Labour MPs had been whipped to oppose the amendment - but there had been concerns that there would be a significant backbench revolt.
Labour MP Keith Vaz told BBC Radio 4's World at One: "A lot of MPs, including myself, would have voted for it - because this is a pretty archaic law." Earlier Labour MP Keith Vaz told BBC Radio 4's World at One: "A lot of MPs, including myself, would have voted for it - because this is a pretty archaic law."
He said he welcomed the government's moves to bring forward its own plans, adding: "There would have been a rebellion and I think the government would have faced a defeat."He said he welcomed the government's moves to bring forward its own plans, adding: "There would have been a rebellion and I think the government would have faced a defeat."
'Free expression''Free expression'
Backbenchers involved in talks with ministers say the government is anxious not to be accused of "bouncing" the Church of England into accepting abolition.Backbenchers involved in talks with ministers say the government is anxious not to be accused of "bouncing" the Church of England into accepting abolition.
But Mr Harris said: "There is cross-party, secular and religious support for confining this unnecessary, discriminatory and censorious law to the history books where it belongs.
"Neither the Church of England nor the government has given a good reason for the blasphemy law to be retained, so it is time Parliament stood up for free expression and against a religious privilege which protects beliefs instead of people."
The blasphemy laws protect belief; they don't protect people Nicholas HytnerTheatre director
His amendment to the bill comes after leading figures, including former Archbishop of Canterbury Lord Carey, wrote to the Daily Telegraph on Tuesday, arguing the legislation was discriminatory as it only covers attacks on Christianity and Church of England beliefs.His amendment to the bill comes after leading figures, including former Archbishop of Canterbury Lord Carey, wrote to the Daily Telegraph on Tuesday, arguing the legislation was discriminatory as it only covers attacks on Christianity and Church of England beliefs.
The letter said it served "no useful purpose" and offered Christian activists a means to intimidate broadcasters, publishers and performers.The letter said it served "no useful purpose" and offered Christian activists a means to intimidate broadcasters, publishers and performers.
The High Court last month rejected an attempt by a Christian evangelical group to prosecute the director general of the BBC for blasphemy over the screening of the musical Jerry Springer - The Opera.The High Court last month rejected an attempt by a Christian evangelical group to prosecute the director general of the BBC for blasphemy over the screening of the musical Jerry Springer - The Opera.
'Respect''Respect'
Its director, Nicholas Hytner, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "What we have now is essentially a secular country based on a common bond of decency which includes free speech.Its director, Nicholas Hytner, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme: "What we have now is essentially a secular country based on a common bond of decency which includes free speech.
"And free speech includes the expectation that there should be mutual respect between those with different beliefs."And free speech includes the expectation that there should be mutual respect between those with different beliefs.
"And I don't believe that the law should address what people believe. The blasphemy laws protect belief; they don't protect people.""And I don't believe that the law should address what people believe. The blasphemy laws protect belief; they don't protect people."
Don Horrocks, of the Evangelical Alliance, agreed that there was "no real argument" for retaining the law, saying: "Everybody knows it's not really going to be used again."Don Horrocks, of the Evangelical Alliance, agreed that there was "no real argument" for retaining the law, saying: "Everybody knows it's not really going to be used again."
But he warned that changing the legislation could "send out a signal" that "gratuitous abuse and offence" is acceptable.But he warned that changing the legislation could "send out a signal" that "gratuitous abuse and offence" is acceptable.
The Criminal Justice Bill is also expected to be altered to include government plans to reintroduce powers to ban strikes by prison officers in England and Wales.
This follows a surprise walkout by 20,000 staff last summer.
The Conservatives, whose 1994 ban on such action was repealed by Labour in 2005 and replaced with a voluntary "no-strike" agreement, said it was a "humiliating U-turn".
Another amendment would ban anyone from paying for sexual services in controlled zones, which local authorities and police would identify.