mediawatchwatch.org.uk

Apparently fearing a defeat at he hands of backbench revolters, the government has all but agreed to abolish the blasphemy law. As a result of Justice Minister Maria Eagle’s speech at the end of today’s debate, Evan Harris withdrew his proposed amendment to the Criminal Justice Bill.

Eagle said the government had “every sympathy” for the case for abolition. Subject to a consultation with the Church of England, which she said would be “short and sharp”, they would bring forward their own amendment to abolish the offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel.

By all means crack open that bottle of bubbles to celebrate this great result. Drink a toast to Evan Harris, Lord Carey, the NSS and the rest. But please do not forget to raise a glass in honour of the man who played a catalytic role in the whole affair, whose nuisance prosecution of the BBC brought the stupidity of this law back into the public arena so recently: thank you, Stephen Green, National Director of Christian Voice!

His god really does work in mysterious ways, doesn’t He?

UPDATE: (Jan 10) The Telegraph – Church ‘accepts end of blasphemy law’
The Guardian – Ministerial compromise averts backbench revolt, Leader
The Independent – Leader

Here are the actual words spoken to the House on this subject:

Maria Eagle: I welcome the opportunity to make the Government’s position clear on the two issues that we have dealt with in the debate on this group of amendments. In speaking to new clause 1, the hon. Member for Oxford, West and Abingdon (Dr. Harris) set out in some detail the case for getting rid of the blasphemy laws, helped by interventions from Members of all parties. The issue has been around for many years. As he said, as long ago as 1985 the Law Commission recommended that the common law offences of blasphemy and blasphemous libel be abolished. The hon. Member for Arundel and South Downs (Nick Herbert) has given quotations from eminent lawyers and others that go even further back, which shows that the issue was around even before then. We can therefore agree that the issue has been debated at great length.

I agree with the many hon. Members who put their names to new clause 1 that it is high time that Parliament reached a settled conclusion on the issue. We accept that the offences have largely fallen into desuetude. The last prosecution for blasphemy was in 1977, in the case of Whitehouse and Gay News Ltd, as Members will recall. It follows that there have been no cases since the Human Rights Act 1998. The idea that the offences appear to be moribund was reinforced by the High Court’s decision on 5 December 2007 that the Theatres Act 1968 and the Broadcasting Act 1990
9 Jan 2008 : Column 454
prevent the prosecution of a theatre, the BBC or another broadcaster for blasphemous libel. That was the result of a case brought by Christian Voice in response to the play “Jerry Springer: The Opera”. I understand that it is seeking leave to appeal.

Against that background, I can say that we have every sympathy for the case for formal abolition. However, we believe it necessary to consult the Anglican Church before bringing forward a provision that particularly affects it. That is what we are now doing urgently. Subject to that consultation, which I can assure hon. Members will be short and sharp, the Government intend to bring forward amendments in another place to achieve the aims of new clause 1.

Dr. Harris: I welcome what the Minister says, and in the light of her comments, I will not press new clause 1 to a Division.

UPDATE: (12th Jan) The church “will not resist”, says Archbishop.