Extracts from Lords
motion to approve the Relationships Education, Relationships and
Sex Education and Health Education (England) Regulations
2019
(Lab):...My colleague MP spoke powerfully when
these regulations were debated in another place last month. He
suggested that when schools are talking about the importance of
having no outsiders and celebrating diversity and difference, the
parents need to ask themselves who they think the teachers are
talking about. As he said, it is not just the gay child at the
front of the classroom. It is the Muslim children in the
playground, the Christians who are still persecuted—horrifically
in Sri Lanka, as we saw just three days ago—and the Jewish people
who are subjected to a rising tide of anti-Semitism. I echo his
pointed question:
“How dare people, in defence of their own difference, seek to
stifle the freedoms and equality of others?”—[Official
Report, Commons, 20/3/19; col. 1162.]
(Con):...As I
said, your Lordships have said a great deal; it has been a wise
debate. It has also been an encouraging debate—it has certainly
encouraged me. I regarded the whole of this subject with great
apprehension when I started reading it, but if the Government can
sort out the difficulty over the mixing of relationship
education and sex education, and the withdrawal
interface, then this can turn into good legislation. However,
that means the inspectorate needs to keep a close watch on how
this develops and we need to know parental reactions to it. My
mailbag and those of my noble friends have been rather different
from those of the noble Lords, and . We have had very large
numbers of letters from Muslims, Jews and Christians; those cares
have to be catered for. We must see what the reactions are and
have a report; first, after three years, when those who are not
in the first flight will have two years’ experience, and then,
probably, five or 10 years later. Mores change in society and we
will have to change the legislation with them.
To read the whole debate, CLICK
HERE
Extract from Lords
statement on Sri Lanka
(Con):
My Lords, while the intended targets of this atrocity were
clearly meant to be Christian, the terrorist bomb does not
discriminate. The Linsey family were members of Westminster
synagogue, of which I am president. Amelie and Daniel shared the
same classes as my children. Amelie celebrated her Bat Mitzvah
just last March, reading with poise, maturity and warmth from our
Torah scrolls. Daniel was especially interested in Jewish
festivals. He came into our synagogue before Purim, a festival a
month and a half ago, to read about Purim, to go to our library
and to help our staff set up for the evening festivities. We have
pledged as a community to offer our love and support to the
Linsey family and to do everything we can every step of the way.
The Jewish community is used to counselling mourners who have
been affected by the terrorist bomb, and this is another chapter
in that sad and sorry book. Will my noble friend the Minister
please double her efforts to ensure that the bodies are returned
as soon as possible? Last night, the families were trying to make
progress. We would be grateful for any assistance that she can
provide through the civil servants to ensure that that happens as
quickly as possible, as required by the Jewish faith.
(Con): I
thank my noble friend. His eloquent and poignant comments
indicate starkly the enormity of what has happened, when children
are the victims of this mindless criminality. Our thoughts are
very much with Amelie and Daniel and their family. The loss of
Amelie and Daniel to the family is grievous and I hope that my
noble friend will convey the condolences of this Chamber to the
family when he is next in touch with them. On the issue of
helping to transport and return bodies to this country, yes,
there is help available and if my noble friend wishes to speak to
me afterwards I will see whether there is something specific I
can do to assist in that respect.
To read all the exchanges, CLICK
HERE
