---

Address in Reply to Her Majesty's Most Gracious Speech

My Lords, in coming to speak in this debate today, it had not occurred to me that I might have to listen to a party political broadcast against the Liberal Democrats on the part of the noble Lord, Lord Marlesford. It seemed to me entirely irrelevant to the purposes of this debate, except in so far as it seems fairly clear to me that a local tax, which is cheap to collect and bears fairly on people according to their ability to pay, must be better than the system under which we are currently suffering. I came here to offer a general welcome to the Government's decision to move early to get the Equality Bill on to the statute book as soon as possible. There has been a long interval since the publication of the Hepple report, during which the existing commissions have had time to assimilate the advantages of the proposals and to reassure themselves, more or less, that their own special concerns will be taken on board within the terms of reference of the new commission. The Bill had a Second Reading in the House of Commons on 5 April last, and the Government have had the benefit of reflecting on the criticisms and concerns expressed in that debate, so the time is ripe for making progress. In the absence of my noble friend Lord Lester of Herne Hill, who I very much hope will be involved in the debate at a later stage, it falls to me to speak on the Equality Bill from these Benches today. However, in the light of the imminence of a Second Reading debate, I will do so in general terms and at no very great length. The need for new, user-friendly and coherent equality legislation and a strong, professional and independent human rights commission to enable it to work correctly has long been part of Liberal Democrat policy. My honourable friend in another place, Malcolm Bruce, spoke in the Second Reading debate in the House of Commons on 5 April. He shared the disappointment felt by many that this Bill has not been preceded by a single equality Act to bring all the civil and human rights aspects of anti-discrimination law into one measure. My noble friend Lord Lester of Herne Hill successfully took such a measure through this House early in 2003. When it reached the other place, the Bill was sponsored by several distinguished honourable Members, including Vera Baird and Angela Eagle, and 246 MPs signed a supporting Early-Day Motion. Unfortunately, time was not made available for a Second Reading. The concern remains that the new commission for equality and human rights created by the Bill, which will reach us soon, will still come before the integrated law that ideally it should be administering and enforcing. However, the Government have made two decisions that could make a difference to the length of time for which we still have to wait for a new equality law. My understanding is that there are two investigations currently in train into how current anti-discrimination law can be modernised. The first is the Equalities Review, headed by Trevor Phillips, into the causes of persistent discrimination in British society. The second is the Discrimination Law Review being undertaken in the Women and Equality Unit of the DTI. The first is to be completed by 2006, but there does not seem to be any end date for the DTI inquiry. Will the Minister give us any indication of the hoped-for date for completing this essential review? During the debate in the other place on 5 April, my honourable friend referred to the 30 Acts of Parliament, 38 statutory instruments, 11 codes of practice and 12 EU directives and recommendations that currently make up anti-discrimination legislation in this country. I agree with him that the sooner the commission for equality and human rights can implement a single equality Act the better. After all, simplification of the law has benefits for those who must implement it and abide by it, as well as for those who benefit from it. Within the sphere of influence of the DTI, clarification and simplification of the law would be of great benefit to industry and commerce, although I am not sure that this message has been received by their representatives. Ensuring that every citizen can play a full part in society, unimpeded by discrimination, has beneficial effects on the economy. It is true that even without an existing framework of new equality law, the Equality Bill will bring benefits for the legal framework of implementation of human and civil rights in our society. For example, the language of Clause 3, with its emphasis on promoting respect for and protection of individual rights, dignity and worth and its concern that each person should be able to play his or her full part in society is most welcome. It is a step towards the fine aim of promoting equality, rather than punishing discrimination, as the basis of a new approach to equality issues. Other matters are also welcome, including the public duty to promote gender equality, although there are concerns about whether transsexual and transgendered people are covered by the provision. Without a Bill before us, it is impossible to say whether the doubts expressed last April about this matter and others, such as the elimination of harassment, have been incorporated in the Bill as it will start in your Lordships' House. I have also heard a variety of views expressed by many people on the subject of the CEHR's budget and about its relationship with government, which we in particular think should be of the greatest possible independence. There are still residual fears about the future promotion and defence of the various strands of equality that could result in over-complication in the provisions for the CEHR's composition and modus operandi. All of that is for the future detailed examination of the Bill. For today, I welcome the Government's decision to introduce the Bill in this House, and I assure the Minister of warm support, mixed with candid criticism, from these Benches. I express my very sincere hope that, in a future that I am here to see, the UK will have a legal framework for equal treatment for all persons in our society.