---

Equality Bill [HL]

My Lords, I am very grateful to everyone who has spoken in this important debate. I begin with Amendment No. 26, about which noble Lords have made clear their views. I completely endorse what has been said about the particular issues that affect those with mental health problems. Indeed, the Social Exclusion Unit report in 2004 concluded that stigma and discrimination against people with mental health problems is pervasive throughout society, backing up everything that noble Lords have said. Despite a number of campaigns, there has been no significant change in attitudes. I agree completely with my noble friend Lord Carter that there is a lot to be done. The Disability Rights Commission’s mental health action group has made good progress in drawing from the range of networks and expertise available to it. I would expect the commission to learn and draw from the Disability Rights Commission’s experience in this area and to continue with a level of engagement through its disability committee, which can continue to make a difference. I am not suggesting that I will include an express requirement in the Bill—noble Lords will know my aversion to lists in all possible ways. However, I think that what my noble friend Lord Wedderburn and the noble Lords, Lord Williamson and Lord Addington, as well as the noble Baroness, Lady Darcy de Knayth, were after clarification about what we expect the commission to be doing. I hope that my answer will satisfy them. On Amendment No. 107, which I will take out of order for a bit of fun, the noble Baroness, Lady Darcy de Knayth, asked in Committee whether the term of appointment of all transition commissioners could be on a common basis. I understand that and I have talked with Mr Bert Massie at length on the issue. We do see some merit in the argument. In a classic way, my note says that this is an issue on which we would like to reflect further. That is code for ““we want to do it but we just need to get clearance””. On the basis that we can go ahead, there is nothing between us. We just need to make sure that we get agreement throughout the Government. I hope that that will make noble Lords feel very happy. On Amendment No. 29, my noble friend Lord Ashley of Stoke said in Committee that he wanted to see a provision included in the Bill requiring disabled people to be among those consulted. He recognised that they probably would be consulted and I sought to confirm that in my response. However, I understand why noble Lords have returned to the matter today. With that in mind, and to remove any vestige of doubt I accept that amendment and thank my noble friend for tabling it.