It is a pleasure to follow my hon. Friend the Member for Hackney, North and Stoke Newington (Ms Abbott), who is my good friend and parliamentary colleague. I fully agree with her. I did not want to interrupt her passionate flow in the debate. She talked about the local race equality councils, but from my experience as a Member of Parliament since 1983, and as a local councillor for 11 years before that, I can say that the local race equality councils stopped serious trouble in parts of our country. I note that there is no guarantee of any local institution being set up, following from this measure.
My amendment—No. 26—is about setting up a London committee, but before I talk about that, I want to praise my hon. Friend the Member for Leicester, East (Keith Vaz) for suggesting that there should be a race committee. I fully support the eloquent and strong case that he made. Indeed, I have added my name to the amendments that he tabled in that regard.
I should also like to mention my hon. Friend the Member for Kingswood (Roger Berry), who talked about the need for the commissioners to have direct experience of the discrimination strands that they are suppose to represent—that was Lord Ouseley’s amendment in the other place. I referred to that on Second Reading, during an intervention, and I still do not think that that has been properly addressed. As my hon. Friend the Member for Hackney, North and Stoke Newington said, the Minister and the Government are hoping that it will come about. I should prefer that to be included in the Bill.
I was not here when my hon. Friend the Member for Hayes and Harlington (John McDonnell) talked about TUPE rights, which are important, and trade union rights. I saw a little bit of data from the last honours list that shows that, whereas scores of businessman got gongs, only three trade unionists did so—and two of them were from trade unions that are not in the TUC. There is a case to be made for trade union representation on organisations such as the CEHR. It is sad that a Labour Back Bencher has to argue for that.
I return to amendment No. 26 and the case for a London committee. I am arguing the case put forward, for example, by the Mayor of London, who said in his representations to hon. Members:"““The Equality Bill does not recognise the unique devolution arrangements in London. The Bill should establish a London Committee, in line with the decision-making committees proposed for Scotland and Wales.””"
Just as my hon. Friend the Member for Kingswood has said, if this is okay in relation to a disability commissioner, if it is okay to have a race commissioner and a race committee and if that is all right for Scotland and Wales, it should be all right for London as well. London has more extensive discrimination problems, but also more positive experiences than the other regions on how to bring about solutions to the problems that we face in the discrimination streams. There is a big case for the London committee. That London context provides unique lessons, opportunities and challenges with regard to equality and diversity. London is one of the most diverse cities in the world and is certainly unique in the UK context.
Equality Bill [Lords]
Proceeding contribution from
Harry Cohen
(Labour)
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 c627-8 Session
2005-06Chamber / Committee
House of Commons chamberSubjects
Librarians' tools
Timestamp
2024-04-21 21:30:37 +0100
URI
http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_291105
In Indexing
http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_291105
In Solr
https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_291105