DDB 3 Department of Work and Pensions
DRAFT DISABILITY DISCRIMINATION BILL AND
ITS APPLICATION TO PARLIAMENT
MEMORANDUM TO THE JOINT SCRUTINY COMMITTEE
FROM THE DEPARTMENT FOR WORK AND PENSIONS
1. This memorandum sets out the reasoning behind
the exclusion of Parliament from clauses 4 and 8 of the draft
Bill. When drawing up these provisions the Government was conscious
of a number of factors which are set out in the attached annex.
2. Services provided by Parliament to the public
at large, such as to visitors, or information provided on the
parliament.uk website, along with employment, are already covered
by virtue of s65 of the Disability Discrimination Act (DDA). The
effect of bringing Parliament into clauses 4 and 8 would be to
bring within the DDA those other things Parliament does. The Government
does not think that this can be done without breaching the fundamental
constitutional principle that the courts should not interfere
with the proceedings of Parliament.
3. The Government does not believe that there
are any functions of Parliament that it would be appropriate to
cover by the DDA beyond those already covered in Parts 2 and 3
of the DDA. That is, the Government is not aware that Parliament
has any additional public functions other than those covered by
Parliamentary Privilege. However, the Government will of course
listen carefully to any representations made on this matter during
the scrutiny process, and would be interested in the Committee's
views on this point.
4. Notwithstanding any restriction on the scope
of the draft Bill, the Houses of Parliament will of course be
able, if they wish, to act as if those clauses applied to them.
However, that would be a matter for the Houses themselves, and
it would not be possible to enforce those duties through the courts.
Department for Work and Pensions
5 January 2004
Annex
Matters considered when deciding to exclude Parliament
from the scope of clauses 4 and 8 of the Draft Disability Discrimination
Bill
a) That Parliament needs to be left free to exercise
its rights and privileges.
b) That Parliamentary Privilege means the courts,
whether by judicial review, or otherwise, would not be able to
consider how Parliament conducted itself when debating or legislating.
c) That extending the DDA to how Parliament exercises
its public functions would conflict with Parliamentary Privilege.
d) That the normal course when drafting legislation
is to assume that it does not apply to Parliament, unless it expressly
states that it will.
e) Section 65 of the Disability Discrimination
Act (DDA) makes it clear that the employment and goods and services
provisions do apply to Parliament, and makes it clear which of
the House Authorities is liable in each case.
f) The employment and goods and services provisions
do not interfere with the functions or privileges of Parliament
as they deal only with how private individuals interact with Parliament
and the house authorities.
g) That the corresponding provisions in the Race
Relations (Amendment) Act do not cover Parliament.
h) That Parliament is not subject to the Human
Rights Act.
i) The Joint Committee on Parliamentary
Privilege, which reported in 1999, recommended that both Houses
should continue to be the sole judges of the lawfulness of their
proceedings, but that matters not closely related to those proceedings
should be subject to the same laws as elsewhere.
| 
