Equality Bill [HL]

My Lords, I beg to move that this Bill be now read a second time. The time is right for the Bill. The Government have moved swiftly to introduce it following the election, after it ran out of time in the previous Parliament. All three of its main elements were manifesto commitments—the new Commission for Equality and Human Rights; a new prohibition against discrimination in the provision of goods, facilities, services and other areas on grounds of religion or belief; and a new duty on public authorities to eliminate sex discrimination and promote equality of opportunity between men and women. The Bill builds on the Government’s achievements in equality and human rights. Parliament has a long and proud record in legislating against discrimination. From the early race legislation in the 1960s and the Equal Pay Act 1970 to the Disability Discrimination Act 2005 via the Sex Discrimination Act 1975, the Race Relations Act 1976 and more besides, these Houses have sought to combat unfairness and exclusion, ensuring equality of opportunity for all members of society. Those Acts are all underpinned by the principles enunciated in the European Convention on Human Rights, which were brought into our domestic law by the Human Rights Act 1998. They protect everyone, from children to the elderly, rich and poor, citizen and visitor alike, with no discrimination whatever. Over the years, much has been achieved, but the picture is many-sided and shifting. Three existing commissions provide institutional support against discrimination on grounds of gender, race and disability, but further equality strands such as age, religion or belief, and sexual orientation do not have such institutional support. Nor is there any institution in this country which has responsibility for the promotion of human rights. There are other major areas for strengthening. Currently, members of all religion or belief groups—including those with no belief—are protected from discrimination in the workplace. In addition, Jews and Sikhs are protected, under case law built on race legislation, from discrimination in the provision of goods, facilities and services. Yet Muslims, Christians and those of other beliefs—or non-believers—do not have the same protection. Also, there is a duty on public authorities to promote equality of opportunity in relation to race and disability, but no such duty to promote equality of opportunity between men and women. It is those three areas that the Bill addresses. It consolidates, strengthens and expands the promotion of equality and human rights and the enforcement of equality legislation by establishing a new Commission for Equality and Human Rights. It remedies the anomaly whereby members of some religions are protected against discrimination in the provision of goods, facilities and services, but members of other religion or belief groups are not. Finally, it encourages public authorities to be more active in ensuring equal opportunities between men and women. Those are the bare bones of what the Bill seeks to do, but it also has an ambitious social aim, which is to transform the way in which we promote equality, tackle discrimination and deliver human rights in 21st-century Britain. The Commission for Equality and Human Rights signals our commitment to a fair and cohesive society founded on equal opportunity for all, respect for the worth and dignity of each person, and mutual respect and understanding between communities. A basic foundation of the Bill is the Government’s firm belief that the creation of a truly equal society is not a minority issue, but an issue for us all. That also makes economic sense, as ensuring that everyone can participate in this country’s economic success is crucial. A dynamic economy relies on harnessing the talents of every one of us and giving each individual the chance to achieve his or her potential, free from prejudice and discrimination. A second foundation of the Bill is the belief that equality and human rights are linked by respect for the value and dignity of each person in his or her own right. Bringing the two together will help to build the culture of respect for human rights which is the underlying aim of the Human Rights Act. The Bill is intended to set in motion a cultural shift, driven by a powerful vision of a fairer society. Much progress has been made, and I hope that your Lordships would join me in recognising the immense achievements of the existing three equality commissions in that respect—the Commission for Racial Equality, the Disability Rights Commission, and the Equal Opportunities Commission. At the same time, I am sure that all of us are only too aware of evidence of persistent inequalities affecting many in our society. Noble Lords may be familiar with   the facts; they make for sombre reading. British Afro-Caribbean men are four times as likely to be unemployed as their white counterparts. Women in full- time employment still earn about 20 per cent less than men. Disabled people are nine times as likely as non-disabled people to be out of work and claiming benefits. Gay men, lesbians and bisexual people can sometimes face discrimination and prejudice in their everyday lives. As we all sadly know, this country still witnesses shameful acts of violence against minority groups. The Bill aims to move us towards a society which reaches out towards its diverse members and communities. It places the emphasis on the positives. The new commission will use its powers to tackle inequality robustly. It will actively promote understanding of equality, diversity, the fair treatment of disabled people and human rights, reaching out to a wide audience. It will improve compliance with the law through promoting understanding of the business benefits of diversity, as much as through its enforcement powers. It will benefit public services by embedding human rights at their core. By promoting understanding between communities, it will help to advance a stronger, more cohesive Britain. The commission will bring a new ethos and style, built on partnership working, responsiveness to stakeholders and expertise. The Bill needs to be seen in the context of other government work on equality, including the two parallel reviews announced in February. The equalities review is led by Trevor Phillips, and is a broad review whose purpose is to look at the long-term and underlying causes of inequality and disadvantage. It is intended to report to the Prime Minister in the summer of 2006. The second element is the discrimination law review. As its name suggests, it will focus on the whole of discrimination law. The Government recognise that the existing law, which has grown up over a period of 30 or more years, has evolved at different paces and established different levels of protection from discrimination for different people. The result is that the statute book currently contains myriad provisions, with inevitable inconsistencies, gaps and deficiencies in treatment. The work of the review is therefore intended to lead to a single equality Bill which will aim to simplify and modernise the law. The introduction of such a Bill during this Parliament is also a manifesto commitment. Some may suggest that we are proceeding in a cart-before-the-horse fashion, and should get the law sorted out before the new commission. I disagree. It is essential to get the new commission in place so that it is there to start using the new law as soon as the law is in place. There is also an urgent need to provide institutional support for the strands of equality law   that currently do not have such support: age, religion or belief, and sexual orientation, as well as independent institutional support for the promotion of human rights. It is also vital to minimise as far as possible the period of uncertainty for the members and staff of the existing commissions, so that the transition to the new one can be as effective as possible. In this way, the Bill before this House marks a major step in revitalising the cultural, institutional and legal framework for equality and human rights in this country. I turn briefly to the detail of the Bill. Part 1 establishes the Commission for Equality and Human Rights and defines its purpose and functions, including its enforcement powers. The commission, as I have said, will take on the work of the three existing equality commissions. It will also take responsibility for the new equality areas of age, religion or belief and sexual orientation. It will also have responsibility for the promotion of human rights. Clauses 1 to 7, with Schedule 1, establish the new commission and set out provisions concerning its constitution, membership, planning, consulting and reporting arrangements and other internal machinery. Schedule 1 provides for at least one commissioner to be disabled, and for a disability committee to oversee the commission’s disability-specific work. It also specifies that there must be commissioners with special knowledge of Scotland and Wales, and committees to advise the commission on its work in Scotland and Wales. Clauses 8 to 13 set out the commission’s promotional and enforcement duties in relation to equality and diversity, disability and communities; and its promotional duties in respect of human rights. Under Clauses 14 to 21 the commission will have general powers to publish information, give advice and guidance, arrange for research and so on. It will be able   to issue statutory codes of practice to assist compliance, and to conduct general inquiries into problem areas for equality and human rights, such as the employment of disabled people in particular sectors. Clauses 22 to 34 are designed to provide the commission with tools to enforce the discrimination legislation. This range of powers is based on those of the existing commissions, with some modernisation and increased flexibility. The remaining provisions in Part 1 concern the transition from the existing three commissions to the new one. Part 2 of the Bill contains provisions that prohibit discrimination and harassment on grounds of religion or belief. This applies to the provision of goods, facilities, services or premises—for example, leasing or selling a house or flat—and in the areas of education and the provision of public functions. Clauses 45 to 47 draw closely on existing provisions in other areas of discrimination law and establish the   key concepts of discrimination, which includes direct discrimination, indirect discrimination and victimisation, and harassment. Clauses 48 to 54 make it unlawful to discriminate on grounds of religion or belief in the provision of goods, facilities or services, to discriminate against or harass a person on those grounds in disposing of or renting property, the provision of education or the exercise of   other public functions. Various exceptions are provided, for example in the case of Parliament, faith schools, the security agencies and the courts. Clauses 55 to 57 extend the prohibition to discriminatory practices, advertising demonstrating an intention to discriminate, and causing another person to discriminate or harass. Clauses 58 to 65 create general exceptions from Part 2. Clauses 66 to 72 contain detailed provisions on how individuals who feel they have been discriminated against may bring proceedings against a person on grounds of committing an act that is unlawful under Part 2. Clauses 73 to 80 contain various general provisions. Finally, Part 3 contains provisions prohibiting public authorities from discriminating on grounds of sex when carrying out their public functions, and creating a duty similar to that which already exists for race and disability, so that public authorities must have due regard to the need to eliminate unlawful discrimination and promote equality of opportunity between men and women when exercising their functions. This represents a major advance in equality between men and women and complements the duties already available on the statute book for race and disability. I have written to the noble Baroness, Lady Miller, and to the noble Lord, Lord Lester, about various changes made to the Bill since it was first introduced in March 2005, and have arranged for copies to be placed in the Libraries, so they are available to all those who are interested. The Bill is naturally of substantial interest, not only to many in this House, but also to the many stakeholders and communities who share an interest in equality and human rights, whether through experience of discrimination or involvement as employers, unions, the voluntary sector or otherwise. I should like to emphasise how intensively the Government have consulted on proposals. We listened carefully to the issues and concerns in the more than 440   responses—from a wide range of individuals and organisations—to our 2004 White Paper. I am pleased that the Government have been praised for our willingness to engage with stakeholders on these issues, and I fully expect that engagement to continue as the Bill progresses through the House. I shall mention two other matters before I conclude. First, the noble Lord, Lord Dholakia, drew to my attention just before we started this afternoon the Delegated Powers and Regulatory Reform Committee’s comments on the Bill. Its conclusion on the power delegated in Clause 65(1) is as follows:"““In our view the power in Clause 65(1) requires considerably more justification, in the absence of which the House will wish to consider whether it finds such an extensive delegation of power to be acceptable””." That is broadly about the ability by delegated power to increase the terms of the exception in relation to Part   2 of the Bill. Of course we need to consider that carefully. The House will know that the Government rarely go against a view of that committee. The committee also refers to Clause 16(3), which is about codes of practice. I can tell the House that we have already accepted the recommendation on that clause. Secondly, the noble Lord, Lord Morris of Manchester, is unfortunately not able to be present this afternoon, although he would have liked to have been. The House will know that he was the first Minister for Disabled People in 1970, and played a key role in establishing the right of disabled people to participate in every aspect of society. Lastly, I wish simply to note the positive reaction and welcome which the Bill received from all sides of the House on Second Reading in the other place in April. I look forward to a positive and constructive debate today, and as the Bill passes through its subsequent stages in this House. The Bill is good for individuals, good for our communities and good for the social and economic strength of our country. I commend the Bill to the House. Moved, That the Bill be now read a second time.—(Lord Falconer of Thoroton.)