| Previous Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, I hear the noble Lord saying, "Be careful, or I'll divide". It is not his most attractive argument, but we do have a great willingness to give the noble Lord at the end of the session some modicum of pleasure. Therefore, I have given up the will to resist.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Lord Bassam of Brighton moved Amendment No. 84:
The noble Lord said: My Lords, these amendments have been tabled to provide further protection to libraries with regard to the search, seizure and forfeiture powers in Clause 28. As your Lordships will be aware, the clause sets out the power to seize and forfeit terrorist publications; the Bill also sets out an appeals process against forfeiture described in Schedule 2. Under that process, it is possible for those from whom publications have been seized to ask a court to consider whether forfeiture publication is just. If the court finds that it is not, it can instruct that the publication be returned.
We in the Government are satisfied that the basic mechanisms of this procedure are appropriate. However, we have given further considerations to these provisions, in the light of changes to Clause 2. This amendment, prompted by those changes, will give further protection to the interests of libraries, for example. That is because publications could conceivably be seized from libraries because of the actions of particular librarians. As a matter of interpretation, it might be the case that the publications in question were indeed terrorist publications, but it might be appropriate to return them if, for example, the library in question was a copyright library and the individual librarian was no longer employed there.
The change from "unjust" to "inappropriate" will allow the court to consider all such issues and to order publications to be returned in such circumstances. In other words, it should enable the court to consider a wider range of issues than would be permitted if the term "unjust" was retained. I hope that your Lordships' House will agree to these welcome changes. I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Lord Bassam of Brighton moved Amendment No. 85:
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Baroness Scotland of Asthal moved Amendment No. 86:
The noble Baroness said: My Lords, I rise to speak to Amendments Nos. 86, 87 and 88. They are all minor technical amendments, and I beg to move.
On Question, amendment agreed to.
Baroness Scotland of Asthal moved Amendments Nos. 87 to 88:
On Question, amendments agreed to.
Disability Discrimination (Northern Ireland) Order 2005
7.41 pm
The Minister of State, Northern Ireland Office (Lord Rooker) rose to move, That the draft order laid before the House on 7 December 2005 be approved.
The noble Lord said: My Lords, I beg to move that the Disability Discrimination (Northern Ireland) Order 2006 be approved. The purpose of this order is to enhance protection for the rights of disabled people and give effect to more of the measures previously proposed in the Northern Ireland Executive's 2001 response to the Disability Rights Task Force report. Although in its report the task force recognised the effectiveness of the framework set out in the Disability Discrimination Act 1995, it did recommend that more work be undertaken to refine the Act and extend its coverage.
The department has already taken forward the main employment proposals set out in the task force's report by way of the amending regulations that came into operation on 1 October 2004. These regulations made significant changes to the Act, such as ending the exemption of small employers from the scope of the legislation and bringing within that scope a number of previously excluded occupations, such as the police, prison officers and fire-fighters.
The order we are debating today would introduce provisions for disabled people broadly in line with those already in force in Great Britain by the enactment of the 2005 Act. I hope it will be helpful to the House if I comment briefly on the order and then say a few words about the detailed provisions. This is an important piece of legislation, intended to widen and strengthen existing disability legislation, thereby ensuring that more people than ever are protected by the Disability Discrimination Act in Northern Ireland. For example, the order would bring more people with progressive conditions—HIV, cancer and multiple sclerosis—within the scope of disability discrimination legislation, and strengthen existing rights in the areas of renting premises and discriminatory job advertisements. It would also close gaps in the existing legislation relating to, for example, the inclusion of local councillors, private clubs and transport services.
Importantly, the order would extend legislation to bring the functions of public authorities within the scope of the Act, and would impose upon public
25 Jan 2006 : Column 1256
authorities a new duty: namely, to promote positive attitudes towards disabled people and encourage their participation in public life. The extension of the Act in this way would bring new rights for disabled people and new duties on the public sector not to discriminate against disabled people across the whole range of its public activities. Those who responded to the public consultation on the proposals agreed that this is an important and welcome piece of legislation for disabled people.
During the public consultation, some concerns were raised that the proposed new duty on public authorities would not mirror that contained in the Disability Discrimination Act 2005. However, we are firmly of the view that the new duty is every bit as strong as those provisions contained in the 2005 Act, particularly when it is considered alongside what public authorities are already obliged to do by way of Section 75 of the Northern Ireland Act 1998.
The Government are confident that the measures we have put in place over the last few years are helping to ensure that disabled people have the opportunity to participate in the workplace, in society and in the economy along with everyone else. Once this order is made—and it has already been approved in the other place—disabled people will then have in place a truly comprehensive legislation framework that will help to eliminate barriers that prevent them from living independent and fulfilling lives. I beg to move.
Moved, That the draft order laid before the House on 7 December be approved.—(Lord Rooker.)
The Duke of Montrose: My Lords, it is with some trepidation that I find myself standing here talking on a Northern Ireland order, conscious of the expertise of so many on this subject. When I saw that the subject was discrimination I was in even greater trepidation, but luckily, as the Minister has pointed out to us, it is a kind of discrimination about which we are all agreed legislation of the nature he has proposed should be put in place. We have no objections to this.
Baroness Harris of Richmond: My Lords, I thank the Minister for bringing forward this order, and I have just a couple of very short questions. We have in the past been promised that all responses to consultations would be published on the departmental website, but, when my honourable friend in another place was discussing this order in Committee, she was unable to access the departmental website to look at them. Has this now been remedied?
As the Minister has pointed out, the Bill closely resembles the Disability Discrimination Act 2005, which applies to England and Wales. That Bill received a great deal of scrutiny in the Commons and the Lords, and it also received detailed pre-legislative scrutiny. We particularly welcome Article 4, which makes it unlawful for public authorities to discriminate against a disabled person in carrying out its functions, and Article 5, which places a duty on every public authority to promote positive attitudes towards disabled persons and to encourage their participation in public life. This is very important,
25 Jan 2006 : Column 1257
particularly for younger people with disabilities. Extra support will always be needed to help them have full participation in society in general.
This order is extremely welcome. It will ensure that public authorities have to be proactive in their approach to disability. It is also important that disabled people should have access to work through more accessible transport, and we warmly welcome the provisions in the order. Will the Minister reassure us that proper action will be taken to ensure that, say, parked cars are cleared from bus stops so that disabled-access buses can get right up to the pavement? This problem is occurring increasingly across the UK, and we need to give it more attention than it has had in the past since the passing of the Disability Discrimination Act. With those few remarks and questions, these Benches are happy to support this order.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |