My hon. Friend gives a good reason why the new body will have to be a first-class example of how to treat employees.
On the subject of the DTI setting a good example, the Minister did not really reply to my question about the gender gap in the Department. Why is there still a 16 per cent. difference between male and female salaries at the DTI? That figure is only marginally better than the national average. That is a disgrace. Why do a significant majority of DTI officials—60 per cent. in a recent survey—not agree with the statement:"““I believe that DTI recognises the diversity of its customers and adapts its policies to reach them.””?"
Sixty per cent. did not agree with that statement, so as my hon. Friend suggested, the DTI and organisations that come under its remit should set the best possible example of any Department.
I want to look in more detail at the provisions relating to religious discrimination and legal aid. There is no provision either in the Bill or in existing legal aid legislation for individuals or organisations to be given legal aid if they are being investigated by the commission or being sued by, or with the backing of, the commission. Nor is there any provision for a person or organisation to recover legal costs in defending themselves from investigation, or in fighting a legal claim backed by the commission. In another place, Lady O’Cathain made the point more eloquently than I could when she said that"““in a legal action over a controversial issue of religious liberties, the enormous financial and legal resources of the commission could be ranged on one side of the legal dispute, leaving a defendant on the other side with limited financial resources at a considerable disadvantage. A church or religious charity being sued would then be left passing round the offering plate to raise money to pay lawyers. In these circumstances, even a bad case could make a lot of progress. It could even succeed. The inequality of resources could result in a miscarriage of justice.””—[Official Report, House of Lords, 9 November 2005; Vol. 675, c. 641.]"
That sums up the point very well indeed, and I hope that the Minister will consider it when she replies to the debate.
We have heard several good speeches this afternoon that referred to religious discrimination. My hon. Friend the Member for New Forest, West talked about political correctness, although I shall not go down that route. However, religious groups by their very nature discriminate on religious grounds the whole time. Several colleagues have given examples of over-zealous interpretation of the existing law and the removal of public references to Christianity. Recently, the Home Office threatened to stop the funding for a carol service for the victims of crime because it was too Christian. Waveney council in East Anglia is planning to scrap grants for Christmas lights because they conflict with its core values of equality and diversity—total nonsense.
Equality Bill [Lords]
Proceeding contribution from
Lord Bellingham
(Conservative)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 21 November 2005.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Equality Bill (HL).
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
439 c1283-4 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-01-26 18:55:42 +0000
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_277538
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_277538
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_277538