Donations to Political Parties
Debate between Baroness Chakrabarti and Baroness Taylor of Stevenage(2 weeks, 1 day ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Taylor of Stevenage (Lab)
I do not want to comment on such donations, particularly from the President of the United States’s family. However, we are taking immediate steps to implement Philip Rycroft’s recommendation for a cap on donations made by overseas electors. We will implement that through the Representation of the People Bill which is currently before Parliament—it is at Report stage in the Commons at the moment. We are committed to upholding and strengthening our democracy by protecting against this kind of foreign interference, improving political transparency and adding tougher checks for donations. However, it is the responsibility of receiving parties as well to carry out the necessary checks involved. I hope that all responsible parties will take their part in doing so.
Baroness Chakrabarti (Lab)
My Lords, if we are concerned about preventing foreign interference and plugging loopholes, as I think we all are, will my noble friend the Minister consider personal donations—small change such as £5 million to a particular Member of Parliament, for example—and foreign money to UK think tanks that are really quite political in their activities?
Baroness Taylor of Stevenage (Lab)
With any donations, it is for those receiving them to make sure they are clear about where those donations come from and what they are for. There are investigations currently going on by the Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards, as we know, so it is probably best that I do not comment specifically on those. Everyone must stop and think about how these donations are used and donated. We need to make sure that the rules that are set for political donations apply to everybody involved in political life, and that there are no exemptions for anybody.
Anti-Muslim Hostility: Non-statutory Definition
Debate between Baroness Chakrabarti and Baroness Taylor of Stevenage(3 months ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Taylor of Stevenage (Lab)
The noble and right reverend Lord is quite correct to say that this definition does not change the law. However, it describes distinct forms of unacceptable hostility that many Muslims experience. We know the terrible things that happen, online and in person, to members of our Muslim community. This should increase understanding across wider society. It gives victims confidence that what they face will be recognised and taken seriously. By setting clearer boundaries around what is and, importantly, what is not anti-Muslim hostility, the definition helps create space for a much more open and honest discussion of sensitive—we know how sensitive these issues are—but wholly legitimate issues. The definition does not restrict criticism, debate or even ridiculing. It is about unacceptable behaviour towards people, not the protection of belief systems.
Baroness Chakrabarti (Lab)
My Lords, I congratulate my noble friend and the working group on a very clear, common-sense definition. Does she agree that it is a very useful public educational tool, not least for signposting actual hard law, such as articles in the human rights convention on free expression and discrimination, and, as my noble friend said, for being clear that free speech, including critique of religion, is protected?
Baroness Taylor of Stevenage (Lab)
I thank my noble friend for making the point about thanking the working group. This has been a very sensitive and very detailed piece of work for it to do, and I am very grateful to the working group, my honourable friend the Minister for Faith in the other place and, of course, my noble friend Lord Khan, who started working on this and did a great deal of work on it previously.
My point, which my noble friend echoed, is that if we cannot clearly define an issue, we cannot properly identify, measure or address it. A definition provides the clarity needed to respond consistently and effectively. It helps distinguish between legitimate debate—which remains fully protected—and unacceptable hostility, prejudice and discrimination directed at individuals. Very importantly, there are elements of the definition that refer to legal procedures and other elements that are aimed more at society’s acceptance that we should not be hostile towards our communities.
Gypsy and Traveller Communities: Accommodation
Debate between Baroness Chakrabarti and Baroness Taylor of Stevenage(1 year, 7 months ago)
Lords ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Baroness Taylor of Stevenage (Lab)
Of course, Gypsies and Travellers have the right to education, just like every other family in this country. We make every endeavour to make sure that the opportunities that are available to all the children in this country are available to Gypsies and Travellers as well, and that we take account of their cultural needs as we do so.
Baroness Chakrabarti (Lab)
My Lords, no doubt all Members of your Lordships’ House engage exclusively in legitimate economic activity. Does my noble friend the Minister agree that this morning is a good time to reflect on the need to avoid demonisation of minorities and polarisation of communities? Notwithstanding the specific duties she set that local authorities have, maybe the Government could help local authorities to promote good relations.
Baroness Taylor of Stevenage (Lab)
I thank my noble friend for that comment. When I was a councillor, I had a Gypsy and Traveller site in my own ward. It is important that all council officers familiarise themselves with the cultural issues around Gypsies and Travellers. Of course, we must all strive, always, to avoid division in our communities; it is very important that communities move forward together. If we are to achieve the full potential of our country, that is exactly what we must do.