Skip to main content

Proceeding contribution from Lord Lester of Herne Hill (Liberal Democrat) in the House of Lords on Wednesday, 13 July 2005. It occurred during Debate on bill and Committee of the Whole House (HL) on Equality Bill (HL).


Equality Bill [HL]

I want to answer the question put to me before the noble Baroness ends her important remarks. When the then Sex Discrimination Bill and Race Relations Bill were coming in, some in the Home Office and police did not approve at all of the legislation that we were enacting. However, it would have been intolerable if those public offices had said, ““We want to remain an office but not comply with the duty not to discriminate””. It would also be intolerable for those concerned with registrars to have to poll them for their views and conscientious beliefs to see whether they would carry out their public functions in accordance with the law of the land. It would not be intolerable, however, to do as the right reverend Prelate indicated and have, so far as possible, a flexible system that would do its best to ensure that one could accommodate different views. That is a matter of flexibility, not obligation. The obligation is to obey the law of the land.


Secondary information

Type
Proceeding contribution
Reference
673 c1155 
Session
2005-06
Chamber / Committee
House of Lords chamber
Subjects
Staff Education Contracts Civil partnerships Care homes Curriculum Courts Carers Age Equality Immigration controls Gender Exemptions Faith schools Harassment Facilities Immigration officers National security Parents Local education authorities Membership Public bodies Older people Public opinion Transport Schools Training Religion Registration of births, deaths, marriages and civil partnerships Sexuality Religious freedom Religious persons Transgender people
Legislation
Equality Bill (HL) 2005-06
Link
View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk