Equality Bill [HL]

I am grateful to the noble Lord, Lord Lester, for raising the issue of the context of this debate in terms of the independence which is an ongoing theme throughout this Bill. I am also very grateful to the noble Baroness, Lady Miller, for her question about advice; I agree with her. If the Government set up a commission, it is a repository of real expertise and information. We need to get that relationship right. That would be proper. This issue fits into the broader context. When the Government want to explore an issue in depth, the commission is the centre of excellence and expertise to which they must turn. It would be absurd not to be able to draw on that expertise. That is what we seek in this part of the Bill. To get that independence and an authoritative perspective are matters that could be of enormous public concern. Noble Lords will be able to think of issues that will be covered by the commission in the context of things that have already happened. What matters for this debate is to try to deal with concerns that these powers encroach unreasonably on the independence of the commission in the context of what the noble Lord, Lord Lester, said about our ongoing debate on independence. I have tried to make clear the importance that we attach to this body being independent and empowered. Obviously, the wide-ranging powers that we have provided in the Bill reflect that. I do not see any inconsistency between that and the powers that we have within the Bill. As the noble Lord, Lord Lester, indicated, there is nothing that is different that is not currently in place for one or more of the three commissions that will be included in the commission initially. Assessments are different because we do not have assessments in the previous legislation, but that is the only example. I am not sure that I have yet heard an example of when the Secretary of State’s direction-making power has inhibited the activities of the current commissions or compromised their independence. If noble Lords, either in your Lordships’ House this evening or in reading our debates, can come up with examples I would be grateful to receive them, but I have tried to look at whether there are examples where that might be the case. I am not sure that the direction-making powers inhibit the capacity or authority of the commission to initiate inquiries or investigations of its own accord. It is inconceivable that the requirements of government would dominate the commission’s work. However, I am prepared to explore ways in which the direction-making power could remain without inhibiting the commission’s ability to conduct the work that it considers necessary. One possible way—the noble Lord, Lord Lester, alluded to it—is to explore the role of the Secretary of State in providing additional resource when directing the commission to advise on the law to conduct an inquiry, investigation or assessment. What lies beneath many of the concerns that noble Lords might have is that somehow the commission’s time is taken up doing the Government’s bidding and it is not able to carry on with its work. Resources lie at the heart of that. We will look at that matter, as we did in the Children Bill, to see what more might be said about it. There is nothing between us in terms of the Government wanting to see this as an independent body able to do the job that it is required to do. It is important that the Government are able to turn to the commission either to deal with points that are of great importance to the public and our society or to get the advice that is necessarily within the commission because of its expertise. On the basis of what I have already undertaken to do, I hope that the noble Lord will be able to withdraw his amendment.