---

Equality Bill [HL]

I support the amendment. My noble friend has made a case for the nomination of commissioners. I understand that to mean people being nominated for selection, but the amendment has been moved in rather stronger terms. However, it is a modest amendment. The reason for nominating such people is that we   have had a special experience in regard to discrimination and equality at work. Employment is a very tender relationship. Although some might think that it has become complicated, in fact this may be an area where the law has enjoyed some success—not only in statutes, which are voluminous enough, but also in judicial case law in the understanding of concepts of discrimination—both direct and indirect. I cite also the experience of the European Union. That has come to bodies which have on them representatives of both employers and employees mainly through the CBI and the TUC. They draw on the roots of their special relationships and from the particular experiences they can bring to this tender area. Clause 15 states that codes of practice are to be dealt with by the new body. That is natural enough, but codes of practice, or what people sometimes refer to as ““soft law”” provisions, are very important indeed in this area. If those codes are to be amended in areas where we have experience of discrimination, such as in sex discrimination and race relations, it would be a great advantage to the new commission to fit in with the experience of those who have seen what happens in the area of employment. The new commission will not arrive with a blank sheet of paper; it will arrive into a society which has a great deal of experience of discrimination and equality in the area of employment. I hope that the Minister will at least welcome the notion that those who have such experience and who are expert in the area should, on all of these bodies—judicial, administrative and many others—be considered, at least, for nomination to the new commission.