The judgment is being seen as a test case, which could leave councils across the country unable to hold their traditional prayers. This will deny Christians the right to prayer — and affect non-Christians, many of whom appreciate the time for reflection that prayers offer in their otherwise hectic lives.
I give Carey credit for enough intelligence to know that that is a load of bollox. Councils can hold traditional prayers as much as they want to, so long as they are not part of the agenda for official council meetings. No Christian is being denied a right to prayer. So, if he knows it's not true, he's blatantly and deliberately lying - possibly in some sort of weird defence of Christianity, possibly because he knows it will appeal to Mail readers and help to sell his book. Either way, there is simply no moral justification for it.