---

Equality Bill [HL]

moved Amendment No. 155:"Page 36, line 19, leave out ““in so far as it is necessary or expedient”” and insert ““if imposed””" The noble Baroness said: My Lords, in moving Amendment No. 155, I shall speak also to Amendments Nos. 156 to 158 and 160 to 162. These amendments respond to the debate in Committee following amendments tabled by the noble Lord, Lord Lester, which would have removed the word ““expedient”” from Clauses 59, 60 and 61, leaving a strict test that restrictions would be allowed under those clauses only when it could be shown to be necessary to do so, given the purpose of the organisation concerned. I said at that time that ““necessary”” by itself was too strict a test but that we would look for an alternative to the word ““expedient””. I believe that the draftsman has with these amendments provided us with a good alternative, which requires that there must be a causal connection between the purposes of the organisation and the restriction, but does not go so far as to require that the restriction is necessary. We believe that it provides a test which is well balanced between strict necessity and expedience, but which should be easily understood by the courts. I pay tribute to the draftsman for producing it and I hope that noble Lords will join me in doing so. I beg to move.