Does Anyone Oppose This Bill?

[anotheoldgit]

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2013/09/tory-mps-ban-burqa-bill-reaches-parliament

/// The bill states that "a person wearing a garment or other object intended by the wearer as its primary purpose to obscure the face in a public place shall be guilty of an offence." It adds that "where members of the public are licensed to access private premises for the purposes of the giving or receiving of goods or services, it shall not be an offence for the owner...to request that a person wearing a garment or other object intended to obscure the face remove such garment or object; or to require that a person refusing a request...leave the premises." ///

I look forward to the debate both on here and also in Parliament.

[hc4361]

Hope he doesn't talk to a woman's chest, Daisy :)

[ichkeria]

I hate to play the "waste of parliamentary time" card so beloved of so many here and elsewhere, but I do wonder whether it's right that pieces of nonsense like this and the other bills mentioned in the article should be given time in the House. I suppose a debate (of sorts) is a good thing even if it goes no further.

I've always wondered at the bizarre coincidence of Messr Bone and Hollobone - is the latter an extra-vacant version of the first perhaps?

[Butterbun]

Well said DaisyNonna. Different standards covers it. It's sheer stubbornness. When I was out in Saudi not all of the women covered their faces. All women had to cover from neck to ankles including arms when out and about.

[SeaJayPea]

Most MPs oppose it if the first line of the final paragraph is anything to go by -

"There's no prospect of any of the bills mentioned above becoming law but their political significance is that they further poison a Tory brand still in need of detoxification."

[THECORBYLOON]

The Bill does not say the covering is a requirement "for leisure etc." it speaks of the "purpose" which is a different matter.

[hc4361]

In that case, the Bill would be pointless, thecorbyloon. What would constitute a leisure activity? Walking, driving, shopping, going on a bus/train/coach trip.....

[Gromit]

That bill will never get through to law. Most MPs, (except the eye swivelling loons) will oppose it.

The State dictating what people can and cannot wear is silly.

[Gromit]

// "The ethnic minority vote is bigger than the majority of the sitting MP in no fewer than 168 seats.

The new study by Operation Black Vote which found that Britain's ethnic minority voters may determine the 2015 election thus makes a point which all of us should have grasped already, though the detail is compelling. In its account of the study today, the Guardian reports that the number of seats where black and Asian voters could decide the outcome had rocketed by 70 per cent compared with the 2010 election, and says that the ethnic minority vote is bigger than the majority of the sitting MP in no fewer than 168 constituencies.  ("The seats extend beyond inner-city areas to include places such as Southhampton Oxford, Sherwood, Ipswich and Northampton," according to the paper.) //

This bill will greatly aid the election of a Labour Government in 2015, if the above report from the ConservativeHome blog is to be believed.

[THECORBYLOON]

HC, I didn't write the Bill, I'm just pointing out the wording of. it. It does not define the meaning of 'leisure' so in the unlikely event of its being passed, it would be open to a challenge

[thatsmethatis]

Sounds reasonable to me.

[jno]

no, no support from me for the clothing police.

[ichkeria]

Yes strange really: rightwing Tories are usually to the fore in criticising things like this and standing up for personal freedom and yet here is one suggesting that we should automatically be breaking the law by merely by covering our faces in public :-)

[youngmafbog]

Sounds good to me. All black and asian people I know dont support tge burka so its not a done deal. Labour may well loose a load of its non .muslim vote if it opposes it. Works both ways.

[hc4361]

I do think the burka and niqab should be banned whilst driving - it is a very obvious danger as it severely restricts one's vision.

[ichkeria]

The bill doesn't mention burqas or niqabs. It just says you'll be guilty of an offence if you cover your face in public unless for vague "leisure" reasons.

Of course we all know where Mr Hollobone is coming from, but he's had to word his bill in such a way as to make it utterly ridiculous.
It will get "parliamentary time" which is the equivalent of allowing Johnny to fly his kite for a bit before teatime :-)

[sp1814]

I think we need to define why women in some traditional Muslim dress pose a problem.

What is it?

And if this became law, it would me that so Muslim women would never be allows to leave the house.

If that happens, could they not reasonably claim benefits...because, y'know - they couldn't go to work.

To me - this piece doesn't appear to have been satisfactorily thought out.

[THECORBYLOON]

This is the Bill by the way, http://services.parliament.uk/bills/2013-14/facecoveringsprohibition.html

[Gromit]

// It will get "parliamentary time" which is the equivalent of allowing Johnny to fly his kite for a bit before teatime //

Brilliant. Spot on Ichkeria :-)

[pixie373]

I don't know SP. I wouldn't move to a country where everyone walked around naked, because i would find it too uncomfortable - even if i was dressed. If it is that offensive to show your face, how can they bear to leave the house anyway?

[New Judge]

"And if this became law, it would me that so Muslim women would never be allows to leave the house. "

So those keeping them in should be prosecuted for false imprisonment.

"If that happens, could they not reasonably claim benefits...because, y'know - they couldn't go to work. "

They could. But they would choose not to - a different thing entirely.