37

House of Commons

Notices of Amendments

given on

Wednesday 3 June 2009

For other Amendment(s) see the following page(s):

Equality Bill Committee 29-35

Public Bill Committee

---

Equality Bill

John Mason

36

Clause  13,  page  9,  line  22,  at end insert—

‘(b)	less favourable treatment includes placing tighter restrictions on

expression related to religion or belief than on expression not related to

religion or belief.’.

Member’s explanatory statement

Makes clear that treating religious speech less favourably than non-religious speech is a form of

direct discrimination.

Freedom of religious speech

John Mason

NC3

To move the following Clause:—

‘A public authority shall permit personal religious expression by those working

for the authority to the greatest extent possible, consistent with requirements of

law and the interests of workplace efficiency.’.

Member’s explanatory statement

Imitates the wording of guidelines issued by President Bill Clinton in 1997 to protect religious free

speech in the federal workplace.

John Mason

37

Clause  18,  page  13,  line  23,  at end insert—

‘(4)	If the protected characteristic is religion or belief, for the purposes of subsection

(1), and subject to subsection (2), a provision, criterion or practice is

Notices of Amendments: 3 June 2009

38

Equality Bill, continued

discriminatory if it requires persons of B’s religion or belief to act in a way which

contravenes the stated doctrinal or ethical teachings of the religion or belief.’.

Member’s explanatory statement

Makes clear that requiring a person to act contrary to the accepted teachings of his or her religion

or belief is a form of indirect discrimination. N.B. Indirect discrimination is still permitted if it is

proportionate—see Clause 18(2)(d).

John Mason

38

Clause  24,  page  17,  line  27,  leave out ‘or’ and insert ‘and’.

Member’s explanatory statement

Raises the threshold in the definition of harassment in order to mirror the wording of EU Directive

2000/78/EC, Article 2.3.

John Mason

39

Schedule  3,  page  150,  line  6,  leave out paragraph 1.

Member’s explanatory statement

Parliament is exempt from the ban on discrimination, harassment and victimisation in the exercise

of its public functions. This amendment would remove that exemption.

John Mason

40

Schedule  3,  page  150,  line  13,  leave out paragraph 2.

Member’s explanatory statement

Parliament’s legislative functions are exempt from the ban on discrimination, harassment and

victimisation. This amendment would remove that exemption.

John Mason

41

Schedule  6,  page  169,  line  15,  leave out paragraphs 2 and 3.

Member’s explanatory statement

Political appointments, honours and peerages are exempt from the ban on discriminating against

office-holders. this amendment would remove those exemptions.

John Mason

42

Schedule  9,  page  181,  line  41,  leave out sub-paragraph (8) and insert—

‘(8)	Employment is for the purposes of an organised religion if—

(a)	A has an ethos based on religion or belief, or

(b)	the employment wholly or mainly involves—

(i)	leading or assisting in the observation of liturgical or ritualistic

practices of the religion, or

(ii)	promoting or explaining the doctrine of the religion (whether to

followers of the religion or to others).’.

Member’s explanatory statement

Sub-paragraph (8) narrows the scope of existing exceptions for religious employment. This

amendment would instead broaden the scope of the exceptions to benefit all religious

organisations.

Notices of Amendments: 3 June 2009

39

Equality Bill, continued

John Mason

43

Schedule  9,  page  181,  line  41,  leave out sub-paragraph (8).

Member’s explanatory statement

Sub-paragraph (8) narrows the scope of existing exceptions for religious employment. This

amendment, in conjunction with the amendments to lines 33 and 37, retains the status quo.

Religious exception—employment

John Mason

NC4

To move the following Clause:—

‘Nothing in this Act shall make it unlawful for any organisation whose purpose

is to advance the interests of persons who share a protected characteristic to

require that all employees support and adhere to that purpose.’.

Member’s explanatory statement

Allows any organisation championing the rights of a protected group to require that all employees

support their aims.

John Mason

44

Schedule  9,  page  181,  line  33,  leave out ‘proportionate’.

Member’s explanatory statement

The addition of a new proportionality test narrows the scope of existing exceptions for religious

employment. This amendment, in conjunction with the amendment to leave out sub-paragraph (8),

retains the status quo.

John Mason

45

Schedule  9,  page  181,  line  37,  leave out ‘proportionate’.

Member’s explanatory statement

The addition of a new proportionality test narrows the scope of existing exceptions for religious

employment. This amendment, in conjunction with the Amendment to leave out sub-paragraph (8),

retains the status quo.

John Mason

46

Schedule  9,  page  182,  line  6,  leave out from ‘requirement’ to ‘if’ and insert ‘to

which sub-paragraph (2) applies’.

Member’s explanatory statement

Place the exceptions from paragraph 2 of Schedule 9 into paragraph 3, which has a broader

framework. This would provide wider protection for the freedom of association of religious bodies.

John Mason

47

Schedule  9,  page  182,  line  13,  at end insert—

‘(2)	This sub-paragraph applies to—

(a)	a requirement to be of a particular religion or belief;

(b)	a requirement to be of a particular sex;

(c)	a requirement not to be a transsexual person;

Notices of Amendments: 3 June 2009

40

Equality Bill, continued

(d)	a requirement not be married or a civil partner;

(e)	a requirement not to be married to, or the civil partner of, a person who

has a living former spouse or civil partner;

(f)	a requirement relating to circumstances in which a marriage or civil

partnership came to an end;

(g)	a requirement related to sexual orientation.’.

Member’s explanatory statement

Place the exceptions from paragraph 2 of Schedule 9 into paragraph 3, which has a broader

framework. This would provide wider protection for the freedom of association of religious bodies.

John Mason

48

Clause  143,  page  105,  line  31,  leave out paragraph (a).

Member’s explanatory statement

Removes the requirement on public authorities to ‘tackle prejudice’, which is not defined in the

Bill.

John Mason

49

Clause  143,  page  105,  line  32,  at end insert—

‘(4A)

Having due regard to the need to foster good relations between persons who share

a relevant protected characteristic and persons who do not share it involves

ensuring a proper balance between the rights of persons who share a relevant

protected characteristic and the rights of persons who share a different relevant

protected characteristic.’.

Member’s explanatory statement

Prevents public authorities using the public sector equality duty to favour the rights of one group

over another.

John Mason

50

Schedule  18,  page  216,  leave out lines 21 to 24.

Member’s explanatory statement

The Commons, the Lords, the Scottish Parliament and the Welsh Assembly are exempt from the

public sector equality duty. This amendment would remove those exemptions.

John Mason

51

Page  107,  line  6,  leave out Clause 145.

Member’s explanatory statement

Removes all ministerial order-making powers related to the public sector equality duty. This would

require the Government to use primary legislation instead.

John Mason

52

Page  107,  line  29,  leave out Clause 146.

Member’s explanatory statement

Removes all ministerial order-making powers related to the public sector equality duty. This would

require the Government to use primary legislation instead.

Notices of Amendments: 3 June 2009

41

Equality Bill, continued

John Mason

53

Page  108,  line  18,  leave out Clause 147.

Member’s explanatory statement

Removes all ministerial order-making powers related to the public sector equality duty. This would

require the Government to use primary legislation instead.

John Mason

54

Page  109,  line  1,  leave out Clause 148.

Member’s explanatory statement

Removes all ministerial order-making powers related to the public sector equality duty. This would

require the Government to use primary legislation instead.

John Mason

55

Page  110,  line  17,  leave out Clause 149.

Member’s explanatory statement

Removes all ministerial order-making powers related to the public sector equality duty. This would

require the Government to use primary legislation instead.

John Mason

56

Schedule  23,  page  235,  line  17,  leave out ‘or’.

Member’s explanatory statement

Adds to the religious exceptions from the ban on goods and services discrimination. Would protect

someone who provides services as a form of religious mission. In conjunction with the Amendment

to line 20, would, for example, benefit a Christian bed and breakfast business where the

proprietors’ goal is to share their faith with guests.

John Mason

57

Schedule  23,  page  235,  line  17,  at end insert—

‘(e)	to provide services as a means of advancing a religion or belief, or’.

Member’s explanatory statement

Adds to the religious exceptions from the ban on goods and services discrimination. Would protect

someone who provides services as a form of religious mission. In conjunction with the Amendment

to line 20, would, for example, benefit a Christian bed and breakfast business where the

proprietors’ goal is to share their faith with guests.

John Mason

58

Schedule  23,  page  235,  line  20,  leave out sub-paragraph (2).

Member’s explanatory statement

Allows commercial religious bodies to benefit from exceptions covering religion and sexual

orientation, so long as they also fit within paragraph 2(1).

John Mason

59

Schedule  23,  page  236,  line  18,  leave out sub-paragraph (10).

Member’s explanatory statement

Currently, religious groups that provide services on behalf of public authorities are allowed to

Notices of Amendments: 3 June 2009

42

Equality Bill, continued

discriminate on grounds of religion but not sexual orientation, for example, Roman Catholic

adoption agencies that will not place children with same-sex couples have had difficulty operating

as they wish. Removing sub-paragraph (10) would allow religious groups to discriminate on

grounds of sexual orientation where they can show their faith requires it.

---

Revised 4 June 2009