15 Mar 2006 : Column 1211
House of Lords
Wednesday, 15 March 2006.
The House met at three of the clock: the LORD CHANCELLOR on the Woolsack.
Prayers—Read by the Lord Bishop of Rochester.
Genetic Testing: Employment and Insurance
Lord Ashley of Stoke asked Her Majesty's Government:
The Minister of State, Department of Health (Lord Warner): My Lords, in their 2003 genetics White Paper, the Government wholeheartedly endorsed the Human Genetics Commission's view that no one should be unfairly discriminated against on the basis of their genetic characteristics. The Government are undertaking a discrimination law review to develop a clearer and more streamlined framework of equality law. It will consider calls to extend discrimination law into new areas, including the case for introducing protection in relation to genetic discrimination. I cannot predict or pre-empt the review's findings.
Lord Ashley of Stoke: My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that extremely promising reply—it sounds as if the Government are really moving on this. However, is he aware that some human rights lawyers, academics, trade unions and GeneWatch UK have expressed deep concern that we now have no legal barriers against the unfettered use of the tests to discriminate against people and that those with genetic disorders in the United States and Australia are being discriminated against by employers and insurance companies? If we do not act shortly, the same kind of thing will happen here. Although we have a moratorium on insurance companies using genetics, it is a temporary measure; there is no permanent solution. We really need some legislation to prevent abuses before they have begun. So will the Government move as soon as possible, please?
Lord Warner: My Lords, in this country there is no evidence of any large-scale genetic testing in the workplace. My noble friend raised the issue of predictive genetic tests. They cannot be used by insurers unless the tests have been approved by the Government's Genetics and Insurance Committee, and there are strict limitations on them.
Baroness Gardner of Parkes: My Lords, is there any suggestion of people being obliged to have genetic tests? I know that insurance companies have had a voluntary code against the practice, but it would be
15 Mar 2006 : Column 1212
terrible if people were forced to have any kind of genetic test if they did not wish to face what they feared could be an unpleasant reality.
Lord Warner: My Lords, we have a ban until November 2011 on the use by insurers of results from predictive genetic tests unless, as I said, the test has been approved by the GAIC. It would have to be for a policy over the substantial financial limit of £500,000 for life insurance and similar high limits for other types of insurance.
Baroness Barker: My Lords, the Disability Discrimination Act 1995 does not cover people who have had predictive genetic tests. Will the forthcoming review of equality legalisation ensure that such people are included?
Lord Warner: My Lords, as I said in my opening reply, I cannot predict what will come out of the review. However, people with a genetic condition are protected by the Disability Discrimination Act once their condition becomes disabling.
Lord Davies of Coity: My Lords, I recognise that discrimination of all kinds is something that we cannot accept. However, people who go for employment generally have to have a medical, and sometimes insurance companies require certain information before deciding what the premium for an insurance policy will be. How does the assessment of genetic difficulties compare with other assessments required for employment and insurance?
Lord Warner: My Lords, as I said, there is no evidence of large-scale genetic testing in the workplace, but the Government have asked the Human Genetics Commission to assess the current prevalence of genetic testing in the workplace and to report back in the spring.
Baroness Wilkins: My Lords, is my noble friend concerned that people will not be confident to take genetic tests unless the Government legislate to ensure their protection against discrimination?
Lord Warner: My Lords, as I said, we have a review in place on the issue, which will explore the concerns. We must await that review's outcome.
Lord Carter: My Lords, I believe that my noble friend, in the context of insurance policies, mentioned a limit of £500,000. Why is there a limit at all?
Lord Warner: My Lords, I said that there was a ban until 2011 unless the test had been approved by the Government's Genetics and Insurance Committee, and it has to be above those limits. So it has to be both approved by the committee and above those limits.
Lord Ashley of Stoke: My Lords, my noble friend says that there is no evidence in this country. However, there is bags of evidence in the United States and
15 Mar 2006 : Column 1213
Australia. Does that not matter to him in terms of the speed of legislation? If we do not act now, then, according to predictions, the practice will definitely come here. The sooner we act, the better. Otherwise we will be following events rather than anticipating them.
Lord Warner: My Lords, we are aware of what is going on overseas, but we must deal, in UK law, with mischiefs in this country. We are having a review, and we will consider that review carefully. A Green Paper in the summer will set out the initial proposals coming out of that review.
Internet: Extremist Organisations
3.13 pm
Lord Janner of Braunstone asked Her Majesty's Government:
The Minister of State, Home Office (Baroness Scotland of Asthal): My Lords, our laws allow full freedom of expression within the limits provided by the Human Rights Act 1998. The Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 and the offences of encouragement to terrorism and dissemination of terrorist publications in the Terrorism Bill, if passed, will apply to the internet. The Association of Chief Police Officers is looking at how racist material on the internet is dealt with, and we continue to work with UK internet service providers to make UK systems resilient to improper penetration by extremist groups.
Lord Janner of Braunstone: My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that Answer. Is she aware, however, that racist organisations in this country are using the net for their purposes, and so, unfortunately, is Amazon—the mail order company—which sells and, of course, profits from the sale of racist and anti-Semitic literature, including Hitler's Mein Kampf and the notorious forgery, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion? In those circumstances, does she agree that our law already places totally acceptable limits on free speech where necessary, including libel, slander and incitement to racial hatred? Will she please call on Amazon and others to stop profiting from the sale of such racist propaganda?
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, I agree with my noble friend that it is important that racist organisations do not make improper use of the internet, which is why ACPO is looking at that very issue. I agree, too, that we have proper limits on free speech, and that anti-Semitic and racist literature is to be deplored wherever it is published. I am confident that Amazon will be aware of what my noble friend says and will doubtless give it the weight that it deserves.
Viscount Bridgeman: My Lords, does the Minister agree that the case mentioned by the noble Lord,
15 Mar 2006 : Column 1214
Lord Janner, is totally different from such bodies as the Muslim Public Affairs Committee, whose activities on the internet provide such disgusting hate mail?
Baroness Scotland of Asthal: My Lords, it is invidious for me to talk about individual cases. What I will say, however, is that any hate material used and placed on the internet is a matter of concern; those are issues, as I have tried to make clear, that we need to address. ACPO, in particular, is trying to find ways of dealing with those issues more effectively.
| Next Section | Back to Table of Contents | Lords Hansard Home Page |