Comic Rowan Atkinson was among the first to welcome the Government's defeat on its Bill to combat religious hatred today, and to applaud the enshrining in law of the right to ridicule religion.

He said the legislation without the hard-won amendments would have merely "papered over" the cracks in our society. It might have appeared successful, he said, but behind it the walls would have continued to crumble.

Mr Atkinson dislikes giving interviews to single journalists, never mind large groups of them. The depth of his concern about the new law, a concern shared by actors, writers and other artists across the spectrum, was illustrated by his giving a rare press conference and inviting questions just hours before the bill was debated in the Commons.

Celebrating the amendments made in the Lords and kept in by MPs in a one-vote victory last night, Mr Atkinson said: "I could not be more pleased with the final version of the Racial and Religious Hatred Bill that has now passed through parliament. From it, it seems to me, everybody gains.

"Those who seek to threaten religious communities will know that such behaviour has now been outlawed and those who have sought to retain the right to criticise and ridicule religious beliefs and practices now have those rights enshrined in legislation in a manner never previously achieved."

Thanking MPs and organisations such as the National Secular Society and the Barnabas Fund, along with the Christian Institute and the Evangelical Alliance, who all campaigned ceaselessly against the legislation, he said: "Something I feel that I have learnt over this long campaign is that hate legislation, no matter how well intended, is never more than a mechanism to paper over the cracks in society.

"Of course, I would sympathise with anyone who says, 'I would rather look at the wallpaper than the cracks', and if such legislation can provide short term comfort to vulnerable communities, that is all to the good. But it will never provide any solutions to the ills of society. In the absence of other action, behind the paper, the wall will continue to crumble."

The Archbishop of York, Dr John Sentamu, who recently took his seat in the Lords, criticised the actions of the Government. "This has been a dog’s dinner from start to finish. The two amendments which were carried attempted to salvage an already flawed Bill. It was not necessary in the first place."

Dr Sentamu told The Times last week of his concern at this Government's propensity to make "too many laws".

Keith Porteous Wood, the director of the National Secular Society said: "This is the best news on freedom of speech for decades. Given we had to have this Bill because it was a Labour manifesto commitment, having the Lords amendments agreed in full was more than freedom of speech campaigners dared hope for.

"We salute the courage of those 27 Labour backbenchers who defied their whip in the cause of freedom of speech."

However, some religious groups were unhappy with the amendments to the bill, which was intended to give Muslims the same protection already afforded to Sikhs and Jewish people under race hatred law. The Muslim Council of Britain said the changes to the bill merely perpetuated existing inequalities.

Sir Iqbal Sacranie, secretary general, said: "Our country today finally has a law that is supposed to prohibit incitement to religious hatred but it is a law that will not extend the same protection accorded to the Jewish and Sikh communities to other communities, including the Muslim and Hindu. While the recognition to legislate against incitement to religious hatred is an important step forward, the amendments made by the House of Lords and adopted by the House of Commons last night, will still continue to perpetuate the inequality that has persisted under the application of existing legislation.

"The Bill had been intended to close a loophole in the law which meant that while some faith groups, such as Jews and Sikhs were rightfully protected against incitement under our existing racial hatred laws, others were not. Far right groups have availed themselves of this loophole and have been increasingly and explicitly targeting British Muslims in recent years.

"Unfortunately, the misinformation and mischief making from popular comedians and some influential sections of the media, supported by certain political groups, has led Parliament to continue to sanction a wholly unjustifiable hierarchy of rights among British citizens. Freedom of expression and speech was never threatened under the incitement to racial hatred laws nor was it to be threatened under the proposed law. This situation is now not only unjust but makes the work of all those engaged in promoting a cohesive and harmonious society in Britain all the more difficult."

The legislation gave rise to the Prime Minister's second and third Commons defeats since coming to power. In a further embarrassment for Tony Blair, it emerged he did not vote in the second division, which the Government lost by one vote, because the Chief Whip had assured him he could return to Downing Street.

In a bid to protect freedom of speech, peers had modified the Bill with an amendment restricting the new offence of inciting religious hatred to threatening words and behaviour, rather than a wider definition also covering insults and abuse which the Government had tabled.

In the most important change, peers also required the offence to be intentional, and specified that criticism, insult, abuse and ridicule of religion, belief or religious practice would not be an offence.

Ministers had hoped the Commons would reject the Lords' amendments and back a Government compromise instead.

The new law as amended will go immediately for Royal Assent but its usefulness is already being questioned because its proposals are covered in the main by existing Public Order and Racial Hatred legislation.

Times Recommends

• Sarah Brown says 'no thanks' to veal at G8 - twice
• Stockton-on-Tees is obesity capital of Britain
• Stores blame poor sales on Murray factor