All 1 Lord Tyler contributions to the Census (Return Particulars and Removal of Penalties) Act 2019

Read Bill Ministerial Extracts

Tue 4th Jun 2019

Census (Return Particulars and Removal of Penalties) Bill [HL] Debate

Full Debate: Read Full Debate
Department: Cabinet Office

Census (Return Particulars and Removal of Penalties) Bill [HL]

Lord Tyler Excerpts
Committee: 1st sitting (Hansard): House of Lords
Tuesday 4th June 2019

(5 years, 5 months ago)

Grand Committee
Read Full debate Census (Return Particulars and Removal of Penalties) Act 2019 Read Hansard Text Read Debate Ministerial Extracts Amendment Paper: HL Bill 175-I Marshalled list for Grand Committee (PDF) - (31 May 2019)
Lord Scriven Portrait Lord Scriven (LD)
- Hansard - - - Excerpts

My Lords, I support the amendments in the name of the noble and learned Lord, Lord Judge, and apologise for being unable to speak at Second Reading. As we have said, this is a very sensitive issue. This is about people making very sensitive decisions about whether to put something on an official form that will be used by the Government. When people come to express their sexuality or gender identity, the threat of it being a potential criminal act could sway people on whether they answer that question.

I want to talk about the context of how the census will be filled in. As the noble Lord, Lord Lipsey, says, if there is ambiguity—if people do not understand the difference between a criminal offence and a penalty—there could be a social media campaign, maybe by a group that, for genuine reasons, does not want people of a particular gender identity or sexual orientation to be seen to be breaking the law. There could be a social media campaign to prevent people openly and honestly answering this question because it is perceived to be breaking the law, and people do not wish to break the law. I totally agree with the noble Lord, Lord Lipsey. I am not a lawyer, but I am somebody who understands the sensitivity of this particular question and the questions that will be posed. Any ambiguity or overarching threat that this is breaking the law, even though there is no penalty, will be counterproductive. Therefore when the Minister answers, could he do so in a way that is very clear to the ordinary man or woman in the street who will be filling in the form? Will he clearly state why it does not create ambiguity and a potential threat to answering this question openly?

Lord Tyler Portrait Lord Tyler (LD)
- Hansard - -

My Lords, I have a very simple point to make. On a constitutional principle, something as important as this should be in the Bill. It will not be sufficient for it to appear in guidance, in the autumn or thereafter. If it is not in the Bill, any explanation or qualification that may result from the ONS rehearsal if this turns out to be an important issue will not be satisfactory. Something as important as this should be in the Bill. I therefore strongly support the amendments in the name of the noble and learned Lord, Lord Judge.