In Westminster Hall, on Wednesday 5 December 2007, Mark Pritchard MP brought a parliamentary debate on Christianophobia. Jonathan Bellamy researched what was said.

"there are plenty of Santas and snowmen but nothing to do with the real meaning of Christmas."

I like Santas and snowmen as well, but I think that we also have to have more about what Christmas is about. Advent calendars are also extremely hard to find. I hope that the British Retail Consortium ensures that its members do not inadvertently fall into the trap of political correctness, but meet the needs and wants of its diverse-including Christian-customer base. Christ has been and always will be at the very heart of Christmas. Without wishing to be irreverent, taking religion out of Christmas is like serving the Christmas turkey without the stuffing.

Other examples include some charity organisations banning Christmas messages or nativity scenes from their shop windows and displays; some-not all-Government Departments banning the word "Christmas" from all official celebrations; and the Home Office spending tens of thousands of pounds a year on celebrating Muslim and Hindu festivals, but very little on celebrating Christmas. The Department for Transport has admitted sending staff to minority religious events, but did not "officially" participate in Christmas celebrations. At the Foreign Office-I am a fan of the Foreign Office-Muslim and Chinese religious events are marked with VIP receptions. I have no objection to that, or to the Home Office celebrating Muslim and Hindu festivals, but why is Easter completely ignored? Such discrepancies in using public money potentially divide, alienate and frustrate, rather than unite.

There are other inconsistencies. Today, many people from the Christian tradition feel that any religious allegiance is permissible as long as it is not the Christian tradition, and that everything is tolerated except a Christian world view. It cannot be right that all views are valid in the public arena as long as they are not traditional or orthodox Christian views. That is both intellectually inconsistent and socially unviable. I hope that the House agrees that no individual, group or organisation should be discriminated against on the grounds of their race, gender or sexuality, and that, equally, Christians should not be discriminated against on the grounds of their beliefs, however counter-cultural or unfashionable those beliefs might be. The lack of Government or public consensus on such issues should not be an excuse or the ground for anti-Christian discrimination. Turning to secularists, it is wrong of the anti-Christian lobby, whether atheistic, humanist or secularist, not to afford the level of tolerance to the Christian faith that they rightly demand for their own world view and beliefs or lack of belief.

If the Government and their institutions continue to marginalise the Church, to try to remove it from public life and the public square, and to fail to acknowledge the Christian traditions that have weaved the very fabric of our nation and its heritage, a faith that espouses love and hope may be hijacked by extremist parties that espouse nothing more than hate and despair. According to an e-mail that I received, this week the British National party in Staffordshire despatched a Christmas card-I have not seen it-which portrays the Holy Family on the front cover and inside are the words "Heritage, Tradition and Culture". Are the Government prepared to stand by and surrender the nation's Christian heritage and traditions to parties of hate and division? In a cross-party consensus, we cannot allow that to happen.

I call upon the Government to ensure that, henceforth, laws against discrimination on grounds of religious belief will be applied equally to people of all faiths and none, and that those people who profess a Christian faith will not be the exception to the law and will not be marginalised and intentionally hurt. It is time for the dragon of political correctness to be slain, and I invite the Government to take the first body blow in the name of freedom of speech and freedom of religion. I can, however, provide an alternative for the Minister. If the Christian Church is now seen by the Government as a minority, then the Government should declare it so, and then afford Christians full minority rights.

The creative industries also need to be consistent on how they treat religion-in print, online and in the broadcast media. So do the television companies and regulators. Regulators need to ensure that they apply equally the rules and criteria on faith issues in programming. I ask the creative industries to listen carefully to my next comment: the fear of violence from a particular faith group should not be the ground for hand selecting or targeting other faith groups who may choose to protest peacefully.

I hope that the Government will confirm that Government Departments and agencies will recognise and celebrate Christmas. The Government must avoid pandering to a secular minority. I also hope the Minister will put it on the record that Christianity remains a central part of this nation's heritage. To say the opposite is to polarise communities rather than bring them together. I hope the Minister will also make clear that public bodies and institutions should not discriminate against Christian groups and organisations.

The full debate.