House of Commons portcullis
House of Commons
Session 2008 - 09
Internet Publications
Other Bills before Parliament


 
 

Public Bill Committee: 9 June 2009                     

65

 

Equality Bill, continued

 
 

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

 

John Mason

 

40

 

Schedule  3,  page  150,  line  14,  leave out paragraph 2.

 

Member’s explanatory statement

 

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

 

timisation. This amendment would remove that exemption.

 

Lynne Featherstone

 

Dr Evan Harris

 

162

 

Parliamentary Star    

Schedule  3,  page  151,  line  14,  at end insert ‘to the extent that the discrimination is

 

a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim.’.

 

Member’s explanatory statement

 

This amendment imposes the ‘legitimate aim’ test when armed forces want to treat a person detri­

 

mentally.

 

Lynne Featherstone

 

Dr Evan Harris

 

123

 

Parliamentary Star    

Schedule  3,  page  151,  line  18,  leave out ‘reassignment’ and insert ‘identity’.

 

Lynne Featherstone

 

Dr Evan Harris

 

159

 

Parliamentary Star    

Schedule  3,  page  153,  line  9,  at end insert—

 

‘(1A)    

In assessing risk in sub-paragraph (1)(a) a blood service cannot make an

 

assumption of risk that relies on all people of a protected characteristic sharing

 

the same risk.’.

 

Member’s explanatory statement

 

This amendment makes clear that blood services cannot use blanket assessments of risk based on

 

people of a protected characteristic, such as their sexual orientation, sharing the same level of risk.

 

Lynne Featherstone

 

Dr Evan Harris

 

160

 

Parliamentary Star    

Schedule  3,  page  154,  line  10,  leave out from ‘following’ to end of line 11.

 

Member’s explanatory statement

 

This amendment redrafts the exception in the application of disability discrimination to immigra­

 

tion matters.

 

John Mason

 

101

 

Parliamentary Star    

Schedule  3,  page  154,  line  11,  leave out ‘for the public good’ and insert ‘to protect

 

public health’.

 

John Mason

 

102

 

Parliamentary Star    

Schedule  3,  page  154,  line  13,  leave out ‘or remain’.


 
 

Public Bill Committee: 9 June 2009                     

66

 

Equality Bill, continued

 
 

John Mason

 

103

 

Parliamentary Star    

Schedule  3,  page  154,  line  14,  leave out ‘or remain’.

 

John Mason

 

104

 

Parliamentary Star    

Schedule  3,  page  154,  line  15,  leave out ‘or remain’.

 

John Mason

 

105

 

Parliamentary Star    

Schedule  3,  page  154,  line  16,  leave out ‘or remain’.

 

Lynne Featherstone

 

Dr Evan Harris

 

161

 

Parliamentary Star    

Schedule  3,  page  154,  line  22,  at end insert—

 

‘(5)    

Section 27 does not apply in relation to sub-paragraphs (2) to (4) only to the

 

extent that any treatment, or a failure to comply with a duty, are a proportionate

 

means of achieving a legitimate aim.

 

(6)    

Regulations may make provision for purposes of sub-paragraph (5) as to

 

circumstances in which treatment, or a failure to comply with a duty, is to be

 

taken to be justified, to the extent that those regulations are a proportionate means

 

of achieving a legitimate aim’.

 

Member’s explanatory statement

 

This amendment redrafts the exception in the application of disability discrimination to immigra­

 

tion matters.

 

John Mason

 

106

 

Parliamentary Star    

Schedule  3,  page  155,  leave out lines 14 to 26.

 

Lynne Featherstone

 

Dr Evan Harris

 

124

 

Parliamentary Star    

Schedule  3,  page  157,  line  20,  leave out ‘reassignment’ and insert ‘identity’.

 

Lynne Featherstone

 

Dr Evan Harris

 

125

 

Parliamentary Star    

Schedule  3,  page  159,  line  4,  leave out ‘reassignment’ and insert ‘identity’.

 


 

Mr Mark Harper

 

John Penrose

 

Mr John Baron

 

Lynne Featherstone

 

Dr Evan Harris

 

11

 

Clause  30,  page  22,  line  6,  leave out paragraph (a).


 
 

Public Bill Committee: 9 June 2009                     

67

 

Equality Bill, continued

 
 

Lynne Featherstone

 

Dr Evan Harris

 

163

 

Parliamentary Star    

Clause  30,  page  22,  line  7,  leave out paragraph (b).

 

Member’s explanatory statement

 

This amendment extends protection against discrimination because someone is married or in a civ­

 

il partnership as it relates to premises.

 


 

Lynne Featherstone

 

Dr Evan Harris

 

164

 

Parliamentary Star    

Clause  34,  page  25,  line  27,  leave out subsection (8).

 

Member’s explanatory statement

 

This amendment removes the powers of Government to remove specific types of premises from the

 

application of this protection.

 


 

The Solicitor General

 

61

 

Schedule  4,  page  166,  line  14,  leave out ‘5(4)(b)’ and insert ‘5(4)(c)’.

 

Member’s explanatory statement

 

This amendment would correct a minor drafting error.

 


 

Lynne Featherstone

 

Dr Evan Harris

 

165

 

Parliamentary Star    

Clause  36,  page  26,  line  22,  at end insert—

 

‘(1A)    

An employer (A) discriminates against a person (B) in the arrangements in

 

subsection (1)(a) if A fails to take reasonable steps to ensure that—

 

(a)    

the selection for interview is carried out on an anonymous basis, or

 

(b)    

the person selecting for interview does not know the gender, race, sexual

 

orientation, age or marital status of B or whether B has a disability.’.

 

Member’s explanatory statement

 

This amendment protects job applicants from subliminal discrimination arising from information

 

assumed from an applicant’s name. It also prevents information being made available to people

 

short-listing that reveals whether an applicant has protected characteristic.

 


 

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


 
 

Public Bill Committee: 9 June 2009                     

68

 

Equality Bill, continued

 
 

office-holders. this amendment would remove those exemptions.

 


 

The Solicitor General

 

62

 

Clause  51,  page  40,  line  14,  after second ‘a’, insert ‘relevant’.

 

Member’s explanatory statement

 

This amendment and amendment 63 would correct a minor drafting error to clarify that the inter­

 

pretation of a reference to conferring a relevant qualification applies in relation to all relevant

 

qualifications. A reference to conferring a relevant qualification would then include a reference to

 

renewing or extending its conferment.

 

The Solicitor General

 

63

 

Clause  51,  page  40,  line  15,  after ‘a’, insert ‘relevant’.

 

Member’s explanatory statement

 

See the explanatory statement for amendment 62.

 


 

The Solicitor General

 

64

 

Clause  53,  page  41,  line  37,  leave out subsection (3).

 

Member’s explanatory statement

 

This amendment would omit Clause 53(3) which excludes from the scope of Clause 52 services the

 

provision of which is otherwise than by way of a trade or profession, reinstating the effect of ex­

 

isting law, whereby the manner in which employment services are provided is irrelevant.

 


 

The Solicitor General

 

65

 

Clause  58,  page  45,  line  19,  leave out from ‘person’ to ‘scheme’ in line 20 and

 

insert ‘who is a pension credit member of an occupational pension scheme as they apply

 

in relation to a disabled person who is a deferred member or pensioner member of the’.

 

Member’s explanatory statement

 

A non-discrimination rule does not apply in relation to pension credit members of an occupational

 

pension scheme. This amendment and amendments 66 and 89 would ensure that disabled pension

 

credit members are protected from discrimination in so far as communications in relation to the

 

scheme are concerned.

 

The Solicitor General

 

66

 

Clause  58,  page  45,  line  26,  leave out subsection (2).

 

Member’s explanatory statement

 

See explanatory statement for amendment 65.

 



 
 

Public Bill Committee: 9 June 2009                     

69

 

Equality Bill, continued

 
 

Mr Mark Harper

 

John Penrose

 

Mr John Baron

 

28

 

Clause  73,  page  55,  line  14,  leave out ‘by regulations’ and insert ‘not’.

 

Mr Mark Harper

 

John Penrose

 

Mr John Baron

 

15

 

Clause  73,  page  55,  line  17,  at end insert ‘and

 

(b)    

employees who have a disability and employees who do not have a

 

disability.’.

 

Mr Mark Harper

 

John Penrose

 

Mr John Baron

 

14

 

Clause  73,  page  55,  line  19,  at end insert—

 

‘( )    

the Armed Forces;

 

( )    

the Security Service, the Secret Intelligence Service or the Government

 

Communications Headquarters;’.

 

Mr Mark Harper

 

John Penrose

 

Mr John Baron

 

13

 

Clause  73,  page  55,  line  20,  leave out paragraph (b).

 

The Solicitor General

 

67

 

Clause  73,  page  55,  line  20,  at end insert—

 

‘( )    

a government department or part of the armed forces not specified in that

 

Schedule.’.

 

Member’s explanatory statement

 

This amendment would exclude the security and intelligence agencies and GCHQ’s military help­

 

ers from the scope of Clause 73. As a result, that clause would not apply to any government de­

 

partment or any part of the armed forces.

 

Mr Mark Harper

 

John Penrose

 

Mr John Baron

 

12

 

Page  55,  line  13,  leave out Clause 73.

 


 

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),


 
 

Public Bill Committee: 9 June 2009                     

70

 

Equality Bill, continued

 
 

retains the status quo.

 

The Solicitor General

 

68

 

Schedule  9,  page  181,  line  36,  leave out ‘work’ and insert ‘employment’.

 

Member’s explanatory statement

 

This amendment would ensure that paragraph 2 of Schedule 9 refers consistently to “employ­

 

ment”.

 

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

 

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 organisa­

 

tions.

 

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.

 

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;


 
 

Public Bill Committee: 9 June 2009                     

71

 

Equality Bill, continued

 
 

(b)    

a requirement to be of a particular sex;

 

(c)    

a requirement not to be a transsexual person;

 

(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.

 

The Solicitor General

 

69

 

Schedule  9,  page  182,  line  26,  leave out ‘52(1)(b) or (c) or (2)(a) or (b)’ and insert

 

‘52(1) or (2)’.

 

Member’s explanatory statement

 

This amendment would expand the scope of the exception in paragraph 5(1) of Schedule 9 (per­

 

mitting discrimination in relation to work for which having a particular protected characteristic

 

is an occupational requirement) so that it applies to all circumstances in Clause 52(1) or (2) giving

 

rise to liability.

 

The Solicitor General

 

70

 

Schedule  9,  page  182,  line  30,  after ‘52’, insert ‘(1) or (2)’.

 

Member’s explanatory statement

 

This amendment would limit the exception in paragraph 5(2) of Schedule 9 (permitting discrimi­

 

nation in relation to training for work for which having a particular protected characteristic is an

 

occupational requirement) so that it applies to discrimination only and not harassment or victim­

 

isation.

 

The Solicitor General

 

71

 

Schedule  9,  page  182,  line  33,  leave out ‘52(1)(b) or (c) or (2)(a) or (b)’ and insert

 

‘52(1) or (2)’.

 

Member’s explanatory statement

 

This amendment would expand the scope of the exception in paragraph 5(3) of Schedule 9 (per­

 

mitting discrimination in reliance on a statement that a particular protected characteristic is an

 

occupational requirement) so that it applies to all circumstances in Clause 52(1) or (2) giving rise

 

to liability.

 

Mrs Sharon Hodgson

 

184

 

Parliamentary Star    

Schedule  9,  page  183,  line  25,  leave out paragraph 8.

 

Mrs Sharon Hodgson

 

185

 

Parliamentary Star    

Schedule  9,  page  183,  line  35,  leave out paragraph 9.

 

The Solicitor General

 

72

 

Schedule  9,  page  188,  line  17,  at end insert—

 

‘( )    

section 38(1) and (3);’.


 
previous section contents continue
 
House of Commons home page Houses of Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries

© Parliamentary copyright 2009
Revised 9 June 2009