I have no quarrel with that argument and I am sympathetic to the intent of the amendments.
In some respects, the key question that needs to be considered is whether one has to have experienced an issue in order to be able first, to understand it, and secondly, to deal with it. I am not sure that I have the answers, but to return to an issue outside the equality agenda, one of the most emotional and sometimes traumatic experiences through which a woman can go is giving birth. A lot of evidence shows that having an understanding midwife will make a big difference to that experience. The key question is whether the midwife has to have given birth in order to understand the experience fully. That might seem an odd parallel, but some would argue that experiencing birth oneself is very important, while others would say that training, empathy and so on can overcome such problems.
I have some problems with the argument about whether the amendment limits the recruitment pool. I always feel highly offended, as a woman, at accusations that all-women shortlists will somehow end up with an inferior candidate. Let me knock that issue on the head. The argument has been raised with me, however, and I feel that I ought to mention it.
The Bill already provides for commissioners to have experience or knowledge relating to a relevant matter, across the strands, and to human rights. The question that I ask myself is whether that is enough. After listening to the hon. Member for Leicester, East, it is clear that there will be wider implications if we do not take seriously the discontent in the black and ethnic minority communities. I would react with absolute horror to a commission that was made up of 10 white men, but I do not think that that will happen. I wonder whether for once we should trust those concerned to get on with it rather than prescribing it in the Bill. I do not know the answer.
The hon. Member for Leicester, East also lauded the Commission for Racial Equality, saying that it was the one place where black and ethnic minority communities could go if they had a problem. Is that really the case? Although the issue was mentioned when I had briefings with the CRE, it did not seem the most important thing on the agenda of those to whom I spoke. It was only after the Bill’s Second Reading that other representative bodies of black and ethnic minority communities came forward and it became obvious that there was a huge amount of discontent. Why did the CRE not make that feeling known at the very beginning? Would a single equalities commission, with a range of people with experience of different discriminations, and with a strong responsibility to consult, be a better way forward?
Equality Bill [Lords]
Proceeding contribution from
Sandra Gidley
(Liberal Democrat)
in the House of Commons on Monday, 16 January 2006.
It occurred during Debate on bills on Equality Bill (HL).
About this proceeding contribution
Reference
441 c613-4 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 21:30:11 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_291078
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_291078
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_291078