---

Equality Bill [HL]

I thank all noble Lords who have contributed to the discussion on the amendment. It seeks to secure a more representative commission that reflects our diversity. The intention is not to prescribe and fetter the opportunity of the body to work in an effective manner in the interests of achieving equality and fair treatment for everyone in this country. I understand the points made and I have both sympathy and empathy with them. As the chair of a commission, I would not wish to be encumbered with too many instructions were I being asked to set up such a body. Moreover, I am not in any way canvassing for the opportunity to do so; I make that point quite clear. However, it is important to understand the reason for bringing forward this amendment. It is based on the wide range of consultations conducted in response to the White Paper published in anticipation of this Bill which revealed that some people have little confidence in the existing commissions, but not necessarily because they are doing a bad job. However, people feel that it is right to put their concerns forward if their support and confidence for the new body is to be won. I have listened to the Minister’s response setting out her understanding of the reasons for bringing forward these amendments. In that spirit, while acknowledging fully and supporting the reasons why there is to be a   disability committee, nevertheless it immediately creates a disparity in which some will see themselves put at a disadvantage. If we do not recognise that conflicts will arise and will have to be resolved, they will grow. I acknowledge too that simply setting out certain specifications in the Bill will not necessarily ease those difficulties. But if we are to command the confidence of the variety of communities to be served, we must recognise the immense disadvantages that continue to be experienced by some sections of our society in spite of 40 years of legislation. If we do not do so, those sections will not perceive this body as one representing their interests in terms either of its visibility or in its construction. I understand what has been said by way of response. The noble Earl, Lord Ferrers, was right to point out that no one appointed to the commission should bring with them their vested interests. Equally, however, if we do not have people who understand those interests and are able to take them forward as part of their ability, skill and competence to tackle a range of duties, the commission will not fulfil its objectives. It is to provide a range of functions in line with its responsibilities and so must be able to respond to the needs of the widest possible range of people. In the circumstances, I beg leave to withdraw the amendment. Amendment, by leave, withdrawn. [Amendments Nos. 4 and 5 not moved.]