UK Parliament / Open data

Equality Bill [Lords]

New clause 9 should be an essential part of this Bill. As my hon. Friend the Member for Buckingham (John Bercow) said most eloquently a few moments ago, there is no logical reason why protection from potential discrimination on grounds of transgender should be treated any differently from protection from potential discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation. The Opposition were pleased that the Government were flexible, far-seeing and honest enough to accept the amendments in the other place that have led to the addition to the Bill of protection from potential discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation. It is a matter of simple logic and reason to say that the same protection should be afforded to people who have chosen to change gender. We have already passed legislation to make formal the status of transgender and we all appreciate that there is no reason why people should not have that protection. I understand why the Minister is likely to argue that the Government do not want to include the new clause at this time: they want to give the matter further consideration as it is part of an ongoing review. We discussed the matter at some length in Committee in a constructive debate. Nevertheless, the hon. Member for Birmingham, Selly Oak (Lynne Jones) proposed the new clause in a thorough and meaningful way and she speaks for many, many Labour Members. She speaks for many Conservative Members, too, and she has the full support of the Opposition Front Bench.

About this proceeding contribution

Reference

441 c571 

Session

2005-06

Chamber / Committee

House of Commons chamber
Back to top