Monday, 25 January 2010

Bravo, Baroness O'Cathain!

                                                 Baroness O' Cathain

"The Government has lost in the House of Lords over its attempt in the Equality Bill to alter the law on who churches and other faith-based groups can employ.

Peers voted 216 to 178 in favour of Lady O’Cathain’s amendment to keep the current law unchanged.
Then in an extraordinary move the Government broke with House of Lords convention in a bid to damage Lady O’Cathain’s victory.
But in two further votes Lady O’Cathain won by 195 votes to 174 and by 177 votes to 172.
In the debate before the votes, the Government claimed its plans would simply ‘clarify’ the law.

Ahead of tonight’s vote a Government spokesman said: “The Equality Bill will not change the existing legal position regarding churches and employment.

“It simply clarifies the current law to ensure a balance is maintained between the rights of people to manifest their religion and the right of employees not to be discriminated against.”   More from the Christian Institute          

If the existing legal position regarding churches and employment was not to be changed, why did the government try this challenge to religious liberty?

And from Andrea Minichiello Williams, Director of Christian Concern for our Nation :

“This is a great day for religious liberty in the UK. We are thankful that the law has not been changed and the freedom of Churches to control their own affairs has not been restricted any further. The results show what can happen when Christians pray and take action. Let us be encouraged that even in an increasingly secular society, the voice of the Church can still be heard.”

Most of all we are thankful to God for answering our prayers. We serve a mighty God!


  1. Interesting result. I wonder if she would be worth approaching to stand for home educators as the jack-boot bill goes to the Lords.
    I am also interested to see the dirty tricks the Government are willing to practice to undermine the democratic process.

  2. This is the first report I have seen of this - I think it must count as an exclusive!